Old Bailey Proceedings.
18th April 1787
Reference Number: 17870418

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
18th April 1787
Reference Numberf17870418-1

Related Material
THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex, HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY; On Wednesday the 18th of APRIL, 1787, and the following Days;

Being the FOURTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Honourable Thomas Sainsbury , LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.




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




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

BEFORE the Right Honourable THOMAS SAINSBURY , LORD MAYOR of the City of London; Sir BEARMONT HOTHAM, Knt. one of the Barons of his Majesty's Court of Exchequer; JAMES ADAIR, Serjeant at Law, Recorder of the said City; JOHN WILLIAM ROSE, Esq; and others his Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer of the City of London, and Justices of Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City and County of Middlesex.

London Jury.

Richard Gardiner

Thomas Hill

John Ben . Cole

Joseph Bygrave

Samuel Smith

William Jones

John Fox

Richard Chapman

Richard Walker

Benjamin Taylor

John Isleton

John Swift .

First Middlesex Jury.

John Bechell

Stephen Randall

William Eyres

Daniel Springthorpe

John Descharmes

William Brodbury

John Derippe

Joseph Newman

Henry Perrin

William Roberts

Humphrey Aspinall

Joseph Cromwell .

Second Middlesex Jury.

Thomas Briggs

John Bagshaw

Henry Briggs

Richard Hart

Samuel Towseland

Thomas Collet

Stephen Briggs

Thomas Essex

Thomas Church

Emanuel Freethy

Edward Westmore

William Fisher .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-1
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

330. WILLIAM PIRTON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 4th day of April , one brown gelding, value 40 s. the property of Alexander Drury Esq.

(The case opened by Mr. Schoen.)


I am a labourer; I sell apples, greens, fish and fowl; I know the prisoner, I was

in company with him at the Bull at Barnett, on the 3d of April; I had just bought a horse, and he said he could help me to many a bargain, I asked him what; he said a man had a horse to sell, and I forgot you; the same man has another horse to sell, and I will speak for you, and he told me he thought the man did not come honestly by it; I went and took a friend with me to see if the man was there; he said he would be drinking in the neighbourhood; I went with my friend to the King of Prussia's Head, and the prisoner came, and had some beer with us; he said the man was not come, but if I would come the next morning at nine to the same house, he would shew me where the horse was; I came twenty minutes before nine; I was to forfeit a pot of beer if I did not come at the time; the first word he said was, by G - d you have lost the pot of beer, you have not come to time; I said, I would be d - d if I had not; he said then stop, I will go with you, and shew you the horse; he took me to Hadley Common , down in a valley, and shewed me two geldings, one a brown, and the other a bay; he told me it was the brown one; I asked him whether he was found or no; he said yes, he had rode him many a time; after he had shewn me the horse, I asked him the price of it; he said four pounds ten shillings; I told him I would have nothing to do with him or his horse either at that price; I walked away about three hundred yards till I got into the road again; he said let us go and have some beer; says I, let us go to Gibbs's; no, says he, we will go the back way to the two Brewers, so we went the back way over a plowed field to the two Brewers, and had three pints of beer, and he told me going along not to say anything about the horse at the time we were there; after drinking the beer, I went away, and agreed for four guineas, and I gave him no earnest just then; but after we had got out of the house, before we had got through the garden, he said it was a customary thing to give earnest for a horse, and I gave him a shilling; at the next alehouse we came to, I said will you have another pint of beer, and he said with all his heart, he would be one pint with me, and he changed the shilling; then I asked him what time this horse was to be delivered; he said he could not deliver it till eight at night; I asked him where I should pay the money; says he, where you think best; says I, suppose we go to the Harrow; I said I would meet him there, and pay him the money, with that he wished me a good morning; with that, I went back and acquainted the landlord, and several more of the neighbours; at one o'clock I met him again, and I took a man along with me to shew him the colour of the horse; he met me, and said has that man been with you; I said no, I had been looking after a cow; says he, I have altered my mind, I will not go into any public house to receive any money, but says he, mind and bring the money to me, and I will deliver the horse to you by the tabernacle just going into the town, so I took these two men along with me to take him into custody; when he came with the horse, I was drinking at the White Bear; he came further than he agreed to, galloping up to meet me; it was about a quarter past eight, as near as I can guess; I asked him what he had done with the horse; he said he would be there in less than ten minutes; he was there, and this gentleman took him into custody.

Mr. Knowlys, Prisoner's Counsel. You was drinking with this man the prisoner? - Yes.

Then you had a conversation about a horse? - Yes.

As soon as this conversation began about the horse, he let you into the secret that it was not honestly come by? - Yes.

You immediately agreed to buy it? - Yes, to be sure I did.

After he had told you that the horse was not honestly come by, after you received that intimation, you agreed to purchase the horse? - Yes, I did.

How long have you been accustomed to

buy such horses? - I thought it was my duty to get at the knowledge where the man was.

Then you bound the bargain, and gave him earnest for it? - I thought it was a duty to bring the man to justice, he would not have brought the horse, provided I did not give him the earnest.

Then you wanted him to commit a felony? - No, I saw the horse at large at Hadley Common ; the horse fed there.

What are you? - I am a higler.

How long have carried on that trade at Barnett? - I have been twenty-five years in Finchley and Barnett.

Have you never been in any scrapes about purchasing things not honestly come by? - Never.

Nor never tried at Hicks's Hall? - I never was at Hicks's Hall.

Have you never been tried any where else? - I never was tried any where.

Have you never said this, that you was very glad now you had got an opportunity of routing this man out of the town? - I never said so to anybody.

Have you never said so? - No, I never did say so, the man never did me any injury.

Did you never say so to Gates the constable? - I never did.

Will you swear that? - I never did.

You refused to purchase it at four pounds ten shillings? - I thought to the best of my knowledge it was not worth more than four guineas.

Why could not you as well agree to give him the whole four pounds ten shillings as four guineas, if you did not mean to make a bargain with him? - A man may make a bargain; he told me it was another man's property, and he thought it was not honestly come by.

If it was your only motive to bring the man to justice, why not agree for four pounds ten shillings, for you never intended to give him any money? - I had the money to pay for it, provided it was honestly come by; if I had not agreed for the money, he would never have brought the horse.

Did you intend to buy the horse? - Yes, if it was honestly come by.

Mr. Schoen. Did I understand you right in your first examination, that you told people of this before you bound the bargain with the shilling, and before you bid four guineas? - Yes, the night before, the Tuesday night, before I gave any money, and before I saw the horse; it was a brown gelding, the inner leg white behind, a star in his forehead, a brown muzzle, and grey about his eye brows.


I am a sheriff's officer; I was in company with Owen, on the 5th of April, if I am not mistaken, I was at the Mermaid, at Barnett; and Owen told me that he had a horse that he had bought, which he suspected was stolen, and if I would go with him, I should find the man and horse at the White Bear, Barnett; I went there and found them; I took the prisoner to the Mermaid, I had him in custody some time; when he found I insisted on taking him before the Justice, he said, I hope you will not hurt me, and I will tell you the whole truth; I did not give him any answer to that.

Were there any promises made to him to tell the truth? - No, he said in the Mermaid that he had stolen the horse; he said it was a horse that had been straying on the common a year or two, and he thought it was no use to the gentleman, and he thought he would take him off the common to sell for three or four pounds, to set him up in some thing.

Mr. Knowlys. Was what he said taken down in writing? - I do not know; I did not see see the clerk writing; I do not think he did sign any confession before the Justice.

Court. Is there any confession?

Mr. Knapp. No.

Mr. Schoen. You saw the horse? - Yes, it was the same horse I took down to the

Mitre; I had him in possession the whole time, and the same horse Colonel Drury swore to the next day.

Mr. Knowlys. What time of night was this? - About half after eight.

Was it dark? - Yes.

Your business was to take care of the person that was given to you by Owen? - Yes.

Who put the horse into the stable? - I did, and I put the prisoner into the hands of the constable.

Where was this that you took the horse? - I took it down to the Mermaid; I slept there that night; after putting him in the stable, I took no more care of him; I saw him locked up safe, and the same horse was there in the morning upon my oath.


I was with Owen and Grant at this time, and James Owen says to me, I am informed this Pirdon has stole a horse, I do not think he has come honestly by him, I wish you would go with me; I went with him, and laid hold of him with the horse in his hand; when James Owen was going to pay him the money, says I, William, this never can be your property; says he, it is my property; no, says I, it cannot be; I gave Grant the horse, and took care of the prisoner.

Did you examine the horse? - Yes, I know it to be the same horse.

Court to Owen. Was this horse that Colonel Drury afterwards swore to be his, the same horse that had been shewn to you by the prisoner, and the same horse that he came galloping up to you upon? - Yes.


I did not know that the horse was stolen till Grant and Owen came to me to tell me they had taken up this man; the next morning I saw him.

Have you any doubt that it is your own horse? - Not in the least.

You are perfectly clear in it? - Yes.


I never took any money of him, no a farthing in the world; he never offered me any money, not a halfpenny, we never agreed for any price; I was coming from the Green Man to the White Bear; it is not above one hundred and fifty yards apart; I have lived in the Parish about thirty-five or thirty-six years; I have a wife and five children; I was going down to my sister; I caught this horse with a halter on his neck; I said to my people, this horse has flung his rider; I tied the horse to the rail opposite to the White Bear; this man came up, and asked me whose horse it was; I said it was Colonel Drury 's horse; they said I had offered it for sale; I said I had not; I told Mr. Grant and Gates immediately as they came up that it was Colonel Drury 's horse.

Court to Grant and Gates. Did he tell you so? - Not till after we had had him to the Mermaid for some time.

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

GUILTY , Death .

He was humbly recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor.

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-2
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

331. MARY KIMES , alias POTTEN was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 9th day of April , thirty yards of printed linen, value 30 s. the property of James Gibson , privily in his shop .


I keep a linen draper's shop in West-street St. Giles's ; on Easter Monday, the 9th of April, I lost a piece of linen; the prisoner came in; she was standing close by where this linen was; I think it was in the forenoon, I am not sure as to the time I saw her; I was waiting on two customers; I was close observing her, and in a moment I missed her, and thought she

must have something, as she went out without asking for anything; I followed her out of the house, and as soon as I was on the outside of the door, I immediately saw the linen under her arm, part of it her cloak did not cover; I took her into custody I believe about five or six yards from the door; I had not time to miss any thing before I pursued her; this is the linen, it is worth thirty shillings; it was the top piece; it lay where she was standing; as soon as I came in I looked, and it was gone; I had seen it not five minutes before; it was piled up in the shop on a pile of carpetting; I was quite near to her.


I saw Mr. Gibson have hold of the prisoner with one hand, and the piece of linen with the other; the linen has been out of my sight since the prisoner has been committed, but this is the same pattern; our private mark is not upon it, therefore I cannot positively say it is the same piece.

Court to Mr. Gibson. You have no doubt but it is your's? - No, I am quite clear of it, for I cut the printer's name out of one corner of it myself.


I never saw it; the gentleman brought it out of me, and said he suspected me some nights before; and he said before the Justice, he would bring several people to witness that he took it from me; I leave it to the Court; I am innocent.

GUILTY , Death .

She was humbly recommended to mercy by the Jury and Prosecutor.

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-3
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

332. EBENEZER SAMPSON was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Silvanus Hanley , about the hour of seven in the night, on the 12th of March last, and burglariously stealing therein, twelve silk handkerchiefs, value 30 s. his property.


I live in White-cross-street ; I keep a linen draper's shop ; the window of my house was broke, on the 3d of March, about seven in the evening; I was in the house; I set my little boy on the outside of the window to watch it; I was behind my counter, and heard the window of my shop break; I was within about two yards of it; I did not see any body at that time; I had my mother, who is sixty years old, watching at the same time; I jumped over the counter, and saw the prisoner about a yard from the door, just as I came to the step of the door, the prisoner run by with something in his hand; I pursued him up the court, I saw him strike a little boy; I called out stop thief, and a person stopped him; I went up to him, and caught him by the collar; says he, I have got nothing, but I will pay for your window breaking; the bundle was dropped, I did not see him drop it, and the witness brought the bundle; I never lost sight of him, but the turning of the corner; I never was above five or six yards behind him.

JOHN DANN sworn.

I was coming out to give my wife some instructions, and I heard the cry of stop thief; the prisoner was running very swift, and many following him; it was Saturday, the 30th of March, about seven in the evening, in White-horse-court I stopped the prisoner; he had under his coat this parcel of handkerchiefs; I had my handkerchief in my hand when I seized him, and in the scuffle the handkerchiefs dropped.

Did you see him drop the handkerchiefs? - I swear he dropped them, for there was no soul near till my niece came and picked them up.

Prisoner. Whereabouts was it that I was stopped? - About four or five doors from my own door; the prisoner shuffled

the handkerchiefs from under his left arm.

If you saw me shuffle the handkerchiefs, why did not you pick them up? - I called for a light; I could not see them.


My uncle called for a light, and I brought him one; I saw the handkerchiefs lay, and I picked them up, and my uncle's was at the bottom of them.

(The handkerchiefs deposed to.)

Prosecutor. I swear to them; here is my mark upon them; they were within eight or nine inches of the window where they lay night and day; I saw them there that evening in putting a candle upon the show board.


I was going of an errand to one Mr. Ridley's, to order a loin of mutton; I was making the best of my way home; I thought this the nighest cut; I heard the cry of stop thief; a man run as it might be to the left hand of me; I ran rather quicker than ordinary for fear of being knocked down; I am taken so unawares there are no witnesses here.

GUILTY, Of stealing, but not of the burglary .

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

[Transportation. See summary.]

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-4
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

333. HENRY HYAMS was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Thomas Worlings , about the hour of six in the night, on the 3d day of March last, and burglariously stealing therein, two cloth coats, value 3 l. a velveret waistcoat, value 14 s. a pair of velveret breeches, value 20 s. a pair of cotton stockings, value 1 s. two silk handkerchiefs, value 5 s. three shirts, value 10 s. a linen neckcloth, value 1 s. 6 d. the property of William Roberts , a muslin apron, value 3 s. a calico shawl, value 2 s. four muslin neck handkerchiefs, value 5 s. three caps, value 2 s. two linen caps, value 1 s. and a muslin handkerchief, trimmed with lace, value 3 s. the property of Elizabeth Frost , spinster .

(The witnesses examined separate.)


I live at Mr. Worling's, at the bear and ragged staffs; he keeps the house; I lost the things mentioned in the indictment; they were in the two pair of stairs room, which is my bed room; on Saturday night the 3d of March, I saw the things in my room, between five and six in the evening; I missed them about ten or a little after; they are all found; the prisoner was taken, going to sell them, in Monmouth street; I did not know the prisoner; I know nothing of any part of the house being broke.


I live at the bear and ragged staff; I am servant there; I lost the things in the indictment, they were all safe between twelve and one in the day, and I went up about ten at night, and they were not there; I never saw the prisoner; I know nothing of any part of the house being broke open; I bolted the door where he got in; I bolted it at noon, and nobody had any occasion to go up there till I went up myself; I bolted it on the outside.

So that forty people might have been up stairs in that time, and you know nothing of the matter? - Yes.


At a quarter past ten on the 3d of March, the prisoner came to sell these things; I have known him a long while; I live at the corner of Monmouth street, a sale shop, and he offered me a coat for fourteen shillings; then he said he wanted a pair of second hand breeches, and he pulled off a pair of black velveret, and asked seven shillings for them; then he said he wanted a waistcoat, and I shewed him a striped waistcoat with sleeves; then he

pulled off a spotted velveret waistcoat, and when he put the suit together, he wanted eighteen shillings for the whole; I suspected him, and went and told my master; he came and asked him how he came by them; he said he had them for his wages of one Mr. Demy, a hair dresser, in Whitechapel; then he said, he was not a hair dresser but a butcher; then he said he could not tell whereabouts in Whitechapel, but he would send for him; then he said he was gone down to Norwich to sell fruit and hard-ware; we stopped him, and I marked the things; they have been in possession of William Saunders, a constable.


I had a parcel of things; between ten and eleven on the 3d of March in the evening, I was fetched; I went to the prisoner and asked him how he got these things; he said he had them for his service, and lived in Whitechapel; he did not disown them to be his; I took off one coat in the little bundle; he said there was nothing but stockings there; I opened the bundle and there was not a pair of stockings there; then I took him to the round-house.

(The things deposed to by Radford as the same the prisoner offered him to sell.)

(The things deposed to by the prosecutor.)

The shirts are marked with a W. I will be on my oath that I paid for them.

Court to Roberts. What is the value of your things? - Five pounds.

What is the value of your things, Mrs. Frost? - One guinea.


I attend the Rotation office, in Litchfield street; I have a pair of stockings I took off the prisoner's legs; they belong to Robert's.

(Deposed to.)


I am a constable; I attended at the office; I have a shirt and a silk handkerchief that I took off the prisoner; they belong to Roberts.

(Deposed to.)


I had the things of my master when he kept a butcher's shop in Whitechapel, instead of my wages; and I came to Monmouth-street to sell these things and buy some others.

Radford. I saw him three times before in the course of a year and a half.

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 39 s. but not of breaking and entering the dwelling house in the night time .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

[Transportation. See summary.]

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-5
VerdictsGuilty > with recommendation; Not Guilty

Related Material

334. THOMAS SERJEANT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 15th of March last, nine wether sheep, value 12 l. the property of Ann Horwood , widow , William Horwood , and James Horwood : and Thomas Smith was indicted for feloniously receiving, on the 15th day of March last, seven wether sheep, price 8 l. being a parcel of the before mentioned sheep, so feloniously stolen, knowing the same to be stolen .


I am son of Ann Horwood ; I am partner with her and William Horwood; till the sheep are sorted and divided, they remain the joint property of us all.

Were these ever separated? - Never; on Monday the 12th of March last, I delivered sixty-one sheep to the drover to take them to Smithfield.

Where do you live? - Just out of Smithfield; on the 15th, the drover went to fetch them from the field, and returned with fifty-two; it is the close or paddock fronting the Small Pox Hospital; I sent my servants to gain every information, and advertised them the next morning, and by

hand-bills, as being lost only, offering two guineas if any information should be given, this produced nothing; I then advertised them as stolen, with a reward of twenty pounds on conviction; this brought forward one Jones, who is not here, and on whose information I took the prisoners, in Spitalfields, the 18th or 19th, I am not positive to the day; I saw them afterwards at the Magistrate's.

Can you swear to the skins? - Only by their being the same mark of those I have lost.

Mrs. Knowlys, Prisoner's Counsel. What business are you? - A wholesale carcase butcher.

Do you always purchase the sheep yourself? - Not always.

When were these sheep purchased? - On the 12th.

Who purchased these sheep? - My brother.

Where were they purchased? - In Smithfield.

Your brother delivered them over to the drover? - No, I delivered them to the drover; my brother made the bargain, and bought them.

How is it you divide the profits of your business? - If my brother buys a hundred sheep, we divide them into two parts; my mother has one fifty, and my brother and me has other fifty; there is no other person concerned in partnership besides my mother and brother.


I am clerk to Mr. Blackborow; I think it was the 21st of March, on the Wednesday morning, the prosecutor came to the office, and gave us information of losing his sheep, and he obtained a warrant against one George Spurgeon ; I apprehended him in Spitalfields; he took us to a house in Brick-lane, Spitalfields, there we apprehended the prisoner Sarjeant, who was in bed seemingly very ill; we brought him away to the public house, and I then told him some little part of the business, which he denied; but a day or two afterwards, he made a voluntary confession, and signed it; it is here.

Had any thing been said to him to induce him to make this confession? - No, there had not; he told us of eight or nine sheep; I told him if he had any hopes, or thoughts that he could get through without making a confession, for God's sake not to make it; but the man seemed to have a great deal of contrition about him, and I believe that was the cause of it.

Mr. Knowlys. If I had said so, would not you necessarily have inferred that if you did make the confession, you would have got through? - No, certainly not; we found skins; I traced the skins to be sold at a skin salesman, in Whitechapel-market.

You found none of the skins at Sarjeant's? - No.

(The Confession read.)

Middlesex to wit,

"The voluntary examination

"and confession of Thomas Sarjeant ,

"taken and made before me William

"Blackborow, the 24th of March,

"1787, who says he has been acquainted

"with one James Webster twelve months,

"and George Spurgeon three weeks; that

"he was at the Black Bull, and Spurgeon

"called him, and he went to another public

"house, where they drank some beer,

"and afterwards returned to the Black

"Bull aforesaid, and there supped together;

"that a day of two after, he met

"Spurgeon at a public-house, who then

"said to this examinant, if you can get

"any sheep, or any thing else, I will buy

"them of you; this examinant went and

"told Spurgeon he should have some on

"the Monday following; that on Sunday

"evening this examinant, in company

"with two others, took three Lincolnshire

"and two Norfolk sheep, from

"a field near Hampstead, and drove them

"to Spurgeon's, and they killed them,

"and four of the carcasses were sold to

"the said Thomas Smith ; also on the

"15th of March instant, at about a quarter

"before five in the morning, in company

" with another person, he took from

"a field near the Small Pox Hospital,

"nine other sheep; they were drove to

"Spurgeon's, and Smith assisted in killing

"them, while this examinant and

"Webster took a walk together, and this

"examinant marked these sheep with blue

"at the desire of Smith."

Court to Lavendar. Was Smith present at the time this confession was signed? - No.

- REDGRAVE sworn.

I went with the last witness to Spurgeon's house, where Sarjeant was in bed, there we apprehended him.

Do you know whether any thing was said to Sarjeant at any time about confessing? - No, there was no promise made to him at all.

Was any thing said to induce him? - No.

Any advice given him? - No.


I went with Mr. Lavender and Redgrave, and apprehended Mr. Sarjeant at Mr. Spurgeon's house.

- SPURGEON sworn.

I am a butcher; the first of my knowing Thomas Sarjeant was at the Black Bull; I knew him nine days before, I was taken on the Thursday morning; this day four weeks, Sarjeant brought me nine sheep, and knocked me up about six, or five minutes after; Smith and Webster called to me, and told me the sheep were come, and desired me to dress myself; I came down, and three were in the yard, the rest were running about the street; I did not know where they were brought from; I can swear to the skins; he told me two days before he had nine sheep to kill; he told me he had bid money for them beforehand; I had no idea that they were stolen sheep.

What time did you receive them? - About six in the morning.

Is that a usual time? - No.

How soon did you kill them? - About half an hour after.

Is that a proper time? - According as people chuse.

Should you like now as a butcher to kill them so soon before they were cool? - No, I should not; I was to give two shillings and ten-pence a stone.

Prosecutor. That is pretty near the mark, within a farthing a pound.

(Spurgeon deposed to the skins marked with blue chalk and red oker.)

Where is the mark? - On the rump, the red is on the right cheek; the red chalk mark was on when they came to me; I put on the blue mark when they brought them in, for I did not see any mark upon them.

If these sheep were to be killed instantly, what was the use of marking them? - We generally do mark them in case of the skins being lost; the others were marked; this is the country mark; there was no particular mark of mine.

Prosecutor. These are the same I saw at the drover's, this is the same mark.

Court to Spurgeon. Did you see Smith about this shop? - Yes, the day before.

What passed between you and Smith the day before? - They came and helped to get the place ready to kill them; Smith and Webster were with me before the sheep came.

Were any of the sheep delivered to Smith? - Seven of them on the Friday morning.

Were any of these seven delivered to Smith? - None of them.

Lavender. Smith acknowledged that he assisted in killing the sheep, and that he bought seven, that was before the Magistrate, I heard him; it was not reduced to writing; when he was charged with receiving these sheep, knowing them to be stolen, he said he did not, he bought them fairly, and gave a fair price for them; we went to Smith's lodgings at Westminster, and we found in a necessary part of a skin of one of the five sheep.


When I first got acquainted with Mr. Spurgeon, he told me if I would bring him any sheep, or calves, or hogs, or dog horses, he would make away with them; then I brought him five, and afterwards nine or ten; says he, send whatever you will, I will get them killed, and I will destroy them the same as if you was here; on the Thursday morning I came there, and found Spurgeon, and this Webster, and Smith, and I was surprized to see Smith, for I knew he did not know any thing of the matter; I went out with Webster, and Spurgeon said he should have the fat for himself; they came to two pound fifteen shillings and three-pence the time before; he paid me only twelve shillings and sixpence; I certainly had the sheep out of the field, which is Mr. Horwood's; I cannot deny it. I have no witnesses.


He was humbly recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor.


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-6
VerdictsGuilty > lesser offence; Not Guilty

Related Material

335. ANDREW PETERS was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of David Davis , about the hour of nine in the night, on the 9th day of March last, and burglariously stealing therein, twelve printed books, value 12 s. one deal box, value 1 s. the property of Francis Brace .

And SARAH ALLEN was indicted or feloniously receiving the same, knowing them to be stolen .


I keep a school at Islington ; I do not apprehend there was any more breaking the house than lifting up the latch, and going into the school, which is on the ground floor; I know nothing of the robbery; these books are the property of the father of two young gentlemen who are boarders in the house, and therefore they consider them under their care day and night; one of them locks them up every night.


I am at school at Mr. Davis's; part of these books are mine; I saw them there the 8th of March.

What were the books? - They were navigation books; they are here; they were kept in the Latin school room; I missed them between six and seven on the morning of the ninth; I was not present when they were found.


I am sixteen; some of there books are mine; my father's name is Francis Brace ; I had seen these books there a little before.


I went to the school for a pail of water, and I found the door shut, and I shut it again.


I am a bookseller; on the 9th of March last, the woman prisoner brought me these books to sell, she asked me five shillings for them; there was nine in number; I bid her three shillings and sixpence; she offered them for four shillings, and went away; I called her back, and gave her five shillings.

(The books deposed to by Edward Brace .)

My name is upon them.


The day after the robbery I went to the prisoner's room, and found this box, and some books; I went to the woman's room, the man was abed, and the woman was up; I found this pistol there, and this handkerchief was tied up; it contained some books, and waste paper and pens.

Did the man say any thing? - He said he found them the night before in a field by Sadler's Wells.

Mr. Garrow. Who advised the indictment for burglary? - I cannot say, I believe Mr. Davis himself first mentioned it.

Is this woman, or does she pass, as the wife of the other prisoner? - That I cannot say.

Upon your oath, do not you know that she went in that character for some time past? - I should suppose by finding them both together, that they lived together; she did not go by his name; I never knew her before that day.

- BRACKNEY sworn.

I found a duplicate in the bed; I went and found out the pawnbroker, and he delivered this book to me, which was pawned the 9th March; it is a bible.

Prisoner Peters. I leave it to my counsel.

Sarah Allen. I leave it to my counsel.

Mr. Davis. She said before the Justice that they slept together, but they were not married.

The prisoner Allen called one witness, who gave her a good character.

ANDREW PETERS , GUILTY Of stealing, but not of the burglary .

Transported for seven years .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-7
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

336. DAVID BOSTOCK was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 14th day of March last, three cotton window curtains, value 10 s. a Sophia cover, value 5 s. and six cotton chair covers, value 6 s. the property of Ann Margrave .

There being no evidence of a felonious taking, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-8
VerdictNot Guilty > no prosecutor

Related Material

337. ALEXANDER BELL was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 24th day of February last, twenty yards of Irish linen cloth, value 20 s. the property of George Smith , privily in his shop .

George Smith and Betty Smith called on their recognizances, and not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOHTOM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-9
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

338. JOHN HAMMOND was indicted for stealing, on the 5th day of March last, one diamond, set in silver, with a wooden handle, called a glazier's diamond, value 8 s. the property of John Judgson , privily in his shop .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron THOMPSON.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-10
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

339. ANN HARRIS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th day of February last, one damask table cloth, value 3 s. a linen handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of William Iles .

Martha Iles being called on her recognizance, and not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-11

Related Material

340. ALEXANDER WILSON , WILLIAM REYNOR , JOHN ELLISON , and WILLIAM DEAN , were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 16th day of April , seven linen shirts, value 35 s. and one frock, value 1 s. the property of John Shepherd , clerk .

(The witnesses examined apart.)

(The case opened by Mr. Garrow)


I am servant to Mr. Linnell, of Paddington; the next door to Mr. Shepherd's, I was at work for my master in the field nearest to our yard, and nearest to Mr. Shepherd's; as I was going away, I turned round in our own yard, and I saw three men look over the rails; that was about one in the afternoon; then there was one over the rails, one getting over, and one in the ditch; they are the rails that come out of Mr. Turner's, that keeps the King and Queen, into my master's field; they were in my master's field, and the foremost man came stooping along in the ditch towards Mr. Shepherd's garden, and the next did the same, and the third likewise, till they got to the end of Mr. Shepherd's garden, where the linen hung by the hedge; I looked after these people, and I went back into the field where I had been at work, and I peeped through the pales; I hid myself from them; I was within thirty or forty yards of them; first one got over the pales to look over, first one took a peep, then another, then one put his foot, and his knees were at the top of the pales, then he got down, then another got up and peeped, then they were all three down at once; then they beckoned with their hand to a fourth man, who was in Mr. Turner's field; that man came in full view of my face; he was a short little thickset man, in a blue coat; then he wanted to come, and they were all in the ditch together; then I thought I saw one almost on the pales, one of their faces was towards me, I thought he watched me; then I went away; two of them then set off in a hurry, and went into Mr. Turner's field, two staid; I went and told my fellow servant to have his eye to the linen; I was gone about a quarter of an hour, and then I saw a woman, and some other people running; I heard an outcry that all Mr. Shepherd's linen was gone; I set off after them, and the three men were taken; I knew them again, and the very shortest one of them said to me, now do you know any thing of me, master? I said, are not you one of the men that the other beckoned to, to come into the field? and he denied it; and I said that the man in the red coat was the man that came within ten yards of me, and the other man in the brown coat, was the man that had his back towards me, and the other I was not so sure of; I know them by their persons very well, and by their dresses; the man in the brown coat had his back to me, and looked over his right shoulder; the man in the red coat was him that came nearest; the little one is the same one, according to appearance, that they beckoned to come to them; I saw the linen found; I saw the servant maid pick out a shirt out of the hole of a tree belonging to my master's field, and I saw the corner of a blue apron hitched upon a hook, the corner of an outhouse at Mr. Ward's; they found a bundle of linen which had been thrown over; I was before the Justice with them, and these men said they had been at the Spotted Dog, at Westborn-green; one said that he knew but one of them; then another said that they all knew one another, and they happened to meet together.

Court. Do you mean to swear positively to all these men? - I can be positive that these are the men I saw first; I have no doubt in the least but they are the same four persons I saw first; I am equally sure of all of them.


I am servant to Mr. Linnell; on Monday last, Woodford desired me to watch those men about a quarter past one, I did; I looked round the garden and the field, and in about two minutes I saw a man taking some linen off Mr. Shepherd's hedge; and immediately the maid called out stop thieves, I directly looked out, and saw one man go over the hedge, and take the linen, and chuck it to another; I was about twenty yards off.

Are you able to speak to the persons of either of them? - I can speak to the one

in a dark snuff coloured coat, (the prisoner Wilson) he took the linen off the hedge, and threw it over to the man in a light coloured coat; I cannot say which he was; I do not know either of the others any further than the man in the brown coat; Raynor joined Wilson, and ran away with him after he jumped over the pales, and the man in the light coloured coat ran on the right hand; I am very sure as to the persons of these men; I saw no more than three.


I am servant to the Reverend Mr. Shepherd; I assisted in putting out the linen; on Monday last about half past twelve in the day, I was sitting in the garden looking after one of the children, and looking to the clothes with my back to the paling; I chanced to look behind me, and saw the prisoner Wilson atop of my master's paling; I saw him leap down to the other side, I saw him go stooping along on the other side of the paling upon the edge of the bank, with his face towards me all the way; and the prisoner Ellison I believe I saw him stooping after Wilson, a little lower in the ditch, so that I could only see the back of his coat; they ran away; I saw good part of the hedge was cleared of the linen, and I immediately cried out stop thief; pursuit was made after these men; I lost sight of them one minute, not more, and when I saw them again, Wilson and Rayner were then running together; I never lost sight of them again till they were taken; I know nothing of Deal; I saw six shirts and one frock found; one shirt I saw found in a hollow tree, there were six other shirts that were found in the out-house; they are at the door now; I do not swear to Ellison; I swear positively I missed the linen while he was on the paling; I did not see them have any of the linen.

Was the linen found in the way they run, or the contrary way? - It was partly the way; I did not see them at the place where the linen was found; they passed the place where the linen was found after I lost sight of them; I was before the Justice of peace, and heard these men say they had been at the Spotted Dog, and had been drinking together.

Did you see them sign the examination before the Justice? - I cannot say whether I did or not.


I am servant to Mr. Shepherd; I heard the alarm of stop thief; I went in pursuit, and I first saw a man in a brown coat that went along on my right hand; when he was going to get over the rails, I saw him drop a shirt out of his coat into the hollow of a tree; I picked it up myself afterwards; it is here; that was the prisoner Wilson, I am sure he is the man; then I saw a man in a blue coat, that is Rayner; he was over the other side; I followed them till they were taken; Rayner was in company with Wilson when he dropped the shirt; I know nothing of the other two men till they were brought back; I saw the rest of the property found in the out-house; there were six shirts, a frock, and a blue apron, the blue apron was on the hooks; one of the prisoners has a blue apron, that was Ellison; it was the very same sort of apron that Ellison had on; I was present before the Justice, and saw these prisoners sign the examination; I saw the Justice sign it; I heard it read over to them; I saw two other men run along, but did not know who they were.


I am a labourer at Paddington; I was coming home to my dinner, I saw a man in the fields just behind the prosecutor's house; I came home about ten yards before, and I heard the alarm of stop thief, and that they had stole some linen; I went back, and saw three men, they were running away; I turned back, and took two of them; they were the prisoners Wilson and Rayner, the other men kept on towards the park paling; I did not know the person of the third man that run.

Did you see the property found? - I was not; they were about one hundred yards from the gardens when I first saw them; I never lost sight of them till they were taken.


I am a sweep; I was at Kensington gravel pits, on Monday last; I heard an alarm of stop thief; I pursued the men, they came close by me; I saw them running across the field, who they were I could not tell, and a multitude of people after them; this man that went towards the Conduit, Akers took care of; the one that came across the road came by me, and I took him, he was going to get over the wall, that was Ellison; I am sure he was one of the four that I saw running together, for I never lost sight of him till he came by me; he came right in between the gentleman and me, and he said there is a gang of thieves coming, they will be over the wall in a minute; he tried to get over the wall, and being out of wind he slipped; then he tried again, and I took him; I could see quite to Mr. Shepherd's garden from the place; when I first saw him, which was on the alarm, he was near Mr. Shepherd's.


I live at Paddington; I am a gravel digger; I heard the cry of stop thief, I saw three men running across the field, one run towards Hyde-park wall, the other two run towards the town; I followed the man that came nearest to me, and I saw Bruce take Ellison; I believe the things are here; I did not see any part of the property found, I only saw three men running very fast, Ellison was certainly one; I cannot speak to the other.


I live at Bays-water; I was in my garden about one, and I heard the cry of stop thief, and the sound came from Paddington; I heard it louder and louder, and I saw one of the prisoners come running alongside the hedge, that was the prisoner Deal; I saw him run about two hundred yards down the hedger side, he was running from Paddington green towards me, and I secured him; I went back, and saw the property secured in the out-house; I did not see the shirt found in the hollow tree, for putting in my hand, I run a nail into it, and blooded the shirt.

Marg. Shepherd. I know all the linen to be my master's property, and the child's frock.

(The examination read.)

Middlesex to wit,

"The examination of

" Alexander Wilson , William Raynor,

" John Ellison , and William Deal , charged

"with stealing linen, taken before me;

"and first, Alexander Wilson says he is

"a shoemaker, and lives at the Cross-keys,

"in Mary-le-bone-lane, having no

"work, he walked out to Paddington,

"where he met Ellison and Raynor, and

"that upon hearing stop thief, he and

"Rayner run away; and the said William

"Rayner for himself says, he is

"a foundation digger, and worked with

"his father, and was with Wilson at the

"time, and hearing the cry of stop thief,

"he run away; and John Ellison says, he

"was walking with Deal, and heard the

"cry of stop thief; that they run away,

"and met Wilson and Rayner, that they

"all went to the Spotted Dog; Deal

"says he was a plaisterer, and was at

"work towards Westborn-green, and met

"Wilson and Rayner, that Wilson and

"Rayner then left them, and soon afterwards

"a cry of stop thief was heard, and

"this examinant was taken.


I keep the Spotted Dog, at Westborn-green; I was at home all the forenoon on Monday last; these four men were not at my house that morning, I never saw them at all; nobody was at home but myself, and a little boy of nine years old; if they had been there, and drank a pot of beer, I must have seen them; never a one of them were there together or single; that I am positive of.

Prisoner Wilson. We were not at the

Spotted Dog; it was a house a little higher up.

The prisoner Wilson called two witnesses to his character.


Each transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-12

Related Material

341. RICHARD GODFREY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 8th day of March , one linen handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of Josiah Foster .

A second count, laying it to be property of a person unknown.


I am shopman to Mr. Dollard, a neighbour to Mr. Foster; I saw the prisoner draw a handkerchief through the glass of the prosecutor's shop, in St. Paul's church yard ; his shop joins to mine; there were four by at the time the glass was cracked; I cannot tell whether there was a hole in the glass; I directly came down stairs, and caught the prisoner as he was going off, and brought him into the shop; the others got off; he was was about a dozen yards from the window, going towards the rails of St. Paul's, and he left another at the window at the same time; I found the handkerchief upon him; he was afterwards taken to the Compter; I took him into Mr. Foster's shop; he denied first he had the handkerchief; afterwards he said he would produce it, and I saw him take it out of his coat; Mr. Foster and all the shopmen are quakers; I am sure I saw him draw it from the shop window; the prisoner said a boy gave it him as he was going along.

What does Mr. Foster deal in? - Shirts and handkerchiefs.


I picked up this handkerchief close to the door, as I came along.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-13
SentenceCorporal > whipping

Related Material

342. WILLIAM JAMESON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 2d day of March last, five pounds weight of almonds, value 5 s. the property of John Court .


I only prove the property; I am son to the prosecutor; the goods were on Sommer's Quay ; there are sweet almonds, and bitter almonds; they are in cellons or baskets; I never saw the prisoner till now.


I was employed as watchman on Sommer's Quay to take care of Court's goods; on Thursday night, the 1st of March, I was on my duty, and I saw this prisoner and another man about eight; they were coming towards the waterside, where the goods lay; I asked them what business they had there; the prisoner said he was going down to Gravesend, on board a Greenland vessel; he went away, and shortly after I saw the same man and another come down, and sit on the bench; he said they were waiting for a Gravesend boat; I told the King's watchman of it, and about ten o'clock I saw the prisoner and the same man go into the Queen's Head; they had a pint of beer, and drank to each other; the prisoner left the house, I followed him; he pretended to be drunk, he made a fall on the basket; about one, I saw the prisoner go on board, and he put his hand and took out the almonds; I ran after him, and he let the almonds fall overboard; he took them after the Gravesend boats had failed; he was on a deck ladder close

to the Quay; we could see them the next morning laying in the mud; the constable has the handkerchief, with part of the almonds; I saw him let the almonds fall; I caught the prisoner by the breast; the other man got clear off.


On the 2d of March, between one and two, the prisoner came across, and took the almonds out, and put them in his handkerchief; I asked him what he was doing; he said nothing; he took the corner of his handkerchief, and let it down, and above half of them fell over board; I snatched the handkerchief from him, he knocked me down; we took him to the watch-house.


I took charge of the prisoner, and picked up some of the almonds.


The said Jameson is a seaman, and shipped himself on board the Chacer, Captain Lawson, found to Greenland; and that as he the said Jameson was going on board, and crossing the lighter, he had occasion to stop, between twelve and one; a man seeing him stop, came to him and said, what do you do there? he replied, nothing but what is necessary; with that, he said he was a thief, and took him in custody, and sent him to the Poultry Compter merely on suspicion; he has a wife, and three children, who depend upon him; he being deprived of proceeding on his voyage, he therefore humbly submits and solicits the interference of your Lordship in his behalf, and that your worships will take his case into consideration.


Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-14

Related Material

343. ANN MATHER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th day of April , one pair of velveret breeches, value 4 s. two cloth waistcoats, value 1 s. the property of John Carter .


I lodged, the 10th instant, at No. 11, in Fleet-lane ; I lost a pair of velveret breeches, and two cloth waistcoats; they were taken out of the room where I lodge; I saw them there on the 9th, at night; in the morning I missed them; they were found on the prisoner; I never knew the girl; she was taken up with these clothes upon her; her mother lodged in a room in the house, and I believe she came to see her mother; I did not hear any body come in; there were two children slept in the room.


I am a watchman; last Tuesday was se'nnight, between five and six in the morning, I stopped the prisoner with these things upon her; I took her to the watch-house; she sent some message to the prosecutor not to appear against her at the Justice's.

(The things deposed to.)


I know these things are my father's property.


Being an unfortunate girl, I was away from my mother; so about four or five I went up to my mother's room to see if she would take me in; as I went up I met a man in a brown coat and a round hat, and brown apron round him; and he asked me to take them to a pawnbroker's; as I was going up Queen-street when the watchman stopped; he saw the watchman before I did, and he run away; I told the watchman it was nothing belonging to him; he said let me see what it is, and he took me to the watch-house.

The prisoner called two witnesses to her character.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-15

Related Material

344. EDWARD HAMILTON was indicted for stealing, on the 4th of April , one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of Francis Hilton .


A man run against me, and I thought he made a push at my handkerchief, just by the Mansion-house; a gentleman said, you have lost your handkerchief, and he run after the prisoner and caught him; I saw him caught; he never was out of my sight; I took my handkerchief out of his bosom; he said he picked it up in the foot path; I took him into custody.

Prisoner. I have nothing to say.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-16
VerdictGuilty > theft under 5s; Not Guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

345. ANN BARRINGTON and MARY CLARKE were indicted for feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Frances Pyne , on the 7th of March , about the hour of three in the afternoon, no person being therein, and stealing one white dimity petticoat, value 7 s. twelve linen caps, value 7 s. a sheet, value 1 s. seven striped muslin handkerchiefs, value 7 s. three ditto, value 2 s. eight ditto, value 4 s. two bed gowns, value 4 s. the property of Frances Pyne .


I live in Star-court ; I went out at two and came back at five; I left nobody in the room; I pulled the door too, but not double locked it; it was locked; when I returned the door was open, and the lock hung on; the staple was forced off; I lost twelve caps, three gowns, eighteen handkerchiefs, white and coloured; they were my own property; I packed them up altogether to be washed; I lost a white dimity bed-gown, a sheet and three pair of sleeves.

What might be the value of all together that you lost? - About thirty shillings; I saw the two prisoners when I went out; I lived in the same house, and they asked me where I was going; I said I was going to work for a shilling, and they bade me good night, and I bade them good night, and away I went.


On the 8th of March, the prosecutrix came to me; I went with the prosecutrix, and in searching about under the table of the prisoner Barrington, there were two old bed gowns, quite rags; I took her into custody, and in the other room, I found the prisoner Clarke, but there was nothing in that room.

Prosecutrix. These are mine; I found this pocket under Clarke's bed, which is mine; and she said it was hers, and belonged to her child.

Court. Does any body else lodge in the same room with the prisoner Barrington? - I do not know; I never saw any body but herself.

Court to Mumford. Do you know? - I do not know; there was her daughter when I was there.

Prisoner Barrington. I lodge by myself; my daughter does not lodge with me; I have no fastenings to the door; it is six-pence a week; and under the straw and hay which I had to lay on, these things were found; I was out in company with this woman, and had part of two pints of beer, and when we came back, she said, she had been robbed, and suspected us.


I am very innocent of the affair; my child used to run in and out of that good woman's room, and she used to give him oysters; we all lodged in the house, by that means the pocket might come; I have known the prosecutrix a great while, and she has known me, and she offered to make it up for ten shillings; I have not ten farthings; she came down to a crown, and offered for that since I have been in Tothillfields.

Prosecutrix. My Lord, they have offered me half a guinea, the man that lives with that woman did, and I would not accept of it.


Fined one shilling , and imprisoned twelve months in Newgate .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-17

Related Material

346. ELIZABETH HOLLIGIN was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th of March last, six pair of worsted stockings, value 8 s. the property of Robert Gibson .


I live in Ryder's-court ; I keep a shop there; on the 26th of March, I lost a pair of stockings; I only prove the property.


The prisoner came into our shop near ten o'clock in the morning, the 26th of March, and asked to look at ribbons; I shewed her some; she said she liked none of them, and I turned to put the ribbons into the drawer, and heard a stocking paper move; I turned round immediately, and saw her whip a parcel under her arm which I was certain she must have taken off the shelf; I halloo'd to her, you thief, you have taken that parcel; upon which she set off; I went out and cried stop thief; she was soon stopped and brought to the door, with the parcel; she never was out of my sight.


I was going past the shop at the same time, and this girl was coming out of the shop, and Mrs. Gibson came out and said, stop thief, and I saw the prisoner throw down a bundle.

(The stockings produced and deposed to.)

Prisoner. She said, if I had ten necks she would hang me.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-18
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

347. JOHN DEARY was indicted for feloniously assaulting Robert Taylor Raynes , Esquire , on the 29th day of March last, on the King's highway, and putting him in corporal fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one purse, value 6 d. three half-crowns, value 7 s. 6 d. and five sixpences, value 2 s. 6 d. his property .


I was robbed the 29th of March, between London and Bays-water, in Saint George's-row ; I was on foot; I met two soldiers; they produced bludgeons and demanded my money; I have not a doubt of the prisoner being one; they were both in their regimentals; it was quite moonlight.

Had the prisoner any thing over his face? - Neither of them had; he had a cocked regimental hat; I delivered him three half-crowns, four new sixpences, and a sixpence with a hole in it; the moment I had given them my money, they told me not to look behind; but notwithstanding that as soon as I had got a very small distance from them, I turned round, and one of them attempted to follow me; I then went on, and at a very small distance, a gentleman and his servant on horseback came up; I told him the circumstance; they pursued them, and I pursued them, and on this side the turnpike the prisoner was taken; I came up as fast as I could run after the horses; I dare say in three minutes; I have no doubt at all of the prisoner; there are two other witnesses here who are not at the back of the bill.


I am servant to Captain James Lutterell ; I was going to my master's house, at Craven-hill, about ten minutes before nine; I met two soldiers; a gentleman's servant came galloping up, and said a gentleman had just been robbed; I said, by two soldiers? he said yes, he believed they were in soldiers clothes; I said, there they are; he came up as I came up; I took hold of the prisoner; the other witness stopped him first on horseback.

Had they any sticks? - I did not see any thing; I put my arms about him, but I did not feel any thing, nor he did not make any resistance; Mr. Raynes came up in a minute and a half after.


I am servant to Mr. Graham, of Duke-street, Saint James's; I met the prosecutor on the road, he said he had been robbed, and he begged my master and me to ride on; and we did, and after we had rode some space of ground we overtook the prisoner; Mr. Raynes described them as two soldiers in regimentals; I dismounted and seized the prisoner; I came up with the prisoner about three minutes after I had spoke to the prosecutor; I only saw this prisoner.

Had this prisoner any weapon with him? - No, I never saw any.

Was this man searched? - Yes, at the turnpike.

Prosecutor. He was not regularly searched at the watch-house; one of Sir Sampson's men produced a stick, but in fact, I did not believe it to be one of the sticks.


I heard a noise in the road, and I looked over the wall to see what was the matter; I was in the park, and got over the wall and stood in the road, and they took me; I have no friends in town.

Nobody from your own regiment nor your company? - Not that I know of.

Jury to prosecutor. Had you lost sight of him? - I had lost sight of him certainly.

Was any of your property found upon him? - Not on this man, there was another man escaped.

Prisoner. There were three other soldiers came by.

Court to Woodcock. Were there any other soldiers came by? - I saw no other but the prisoner.

Prisoner. The other witness said he saw the other soldier.

Court to Fisher. Did you own you saw the other soldier upon the road at that time? - No, I did not see any body at all on that side of the road.

Did you see any body in regimentals on the road, within five or ten minutes? - No.

Did you ever say you did? - No.

Prisoner. Yes, my Lord, he did say so.

Court to Fisher. Did you see two men together? - Yes, I did when the horse was standing, then I saw them about three or four yards distance; he rode on the pathway, and I thought he had taken the other; I never saw the other when he went off; I saw him run before me; I only saw them men and nobody going up that side of the road; I was in the middle of the road, and there were some people walking on the other side of the road, but nobody coming towards the turnpike.

GUILTY , Death .

He was humbly recommended to mercy by the prosecutor.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-19
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

348. HANNAH PLEASANT JONES was indicted for feloniously assaulting Charlotte Spencer , a woman child, on the King's highway, on the 5th day of March last, and putting her in fear, and feloniously taking from her person and against her will, one cotton frock, value 2 s. a pair of gold ear-wires, value 2 s. a wicker basket, value 6 d. six pounds weight of black puddings, value 2 s. two pounds weight of savilloys, value 10 d. the property of William Spencer .

(The case opened by Mr. Garrow.)

Court to Charlotte Spencer . How old are you? - Going of nine.

Do you go to church? - Yes.

What church do you go to? - It is in Smithfield.

How often do you go? - A good many times.

Can you say your catechism? - Yes.

Do you know what you are coming to do? - No Sir.

Do you know the consequence of swearing falsely? - No.

Mr. Garrow. Do you know what will happen to you when you are sworn? - No.

Do you know where naughty girls go to when they die? - Yes, to the naughty man.

Court. I think such a child cannot give evidence in a capital case.

Mr. Garrow. I shall confine myself to the proving, if I can, that this woman stole from the child these several articles which were found.


I am a butcher ; I live in Sharp's-alley, Cow-cross; I have dwelled there twenty years; I work in Newgate-market, the child Sarah, who is the elder of the two, returned home about one in the day, when she appeared to me to be very much intoxicated; we did not find Charlotte till eleven at night; we had her cried in several parishes, and in St. Giles's my son found her.


I am mother of this little girl; I sent her out the day she was missed, about ten, and they took some black pluddings and some sausages; they were in two baskets; they had each of them a basket, they would not go out without each other; Charlotte had

a dark cotton frock on, and a pair of gold ear-rings in her ears; Sarah returned about one in the day; she appeared to be rather stupid with liquor; we did not find the other till between eleven and twelve at night; I was at home; I have not seen that cotton frock since, but it is here.

Sarah Spencer . I was eleven last October; I can say my catechism; I go to church on a Sunday.

Do you know the nature of an oath? - No.

What becomes of people that tell lies? - They go to hell, Sir.

Then do you know that you are bound to tell the truth, and that you would go to hell if you did not? - Yes.

Have you ever heard of such a thing as the pillory? - Yes, I have seen it.

Do you know that people that swear false are put into the pillory? - No.


Did you go out with your sister on Monday? - Yes.

Where was she to go to? - To Fetter-lane.

Had you any where to go after that? - No.

Then you was to return home? - Yes.

Did you meet with any body? - Yes, with the prisoner at the bar.

Where did you meet with her? - In Fetter-lane.

What did she say to you? - She said to another, a strange woman, there go my two God-children; and she said it was a very cold morning, let us go in and have something to drink; she said so to my sister; then she went into a publick house and called for a pint of purl, and the gentleman gave her change; I said several times to my sister softly, let us go home; then I spoke loud, and the prisoner said, I am going home to your God-mama's, and I will go with you; then she took us all to Fetter-lane and Hatton-garden; we all drank of it, and because Charlotte did not like it, she poured a good deal down Charlotte's bosom, because she would not drink it; she said my mother had lent her a guinea when she lay in; she left my sister at an ale-house, in Turn-stile; I was with her; then she emptied all the things into a basket which was mine; then she took me up to Hatton-garden again, and to Fetter-lane again; she left the empty basket with Charlotte and her bundle; and she said, there was a muslin gown and a muslin apron, and told Charlotte not to open it; they were in a bit of flowered thing; when she got me into Hatton-garden, I asked her how much further; into Clare-market, she said; says I, I must not go all that way, my mother will be angry; then she came into Holborn and she fell down, and I took my basket away from her, and I fell crying, and she said, then if I cried, she would stamp my guts out; then she took my basket; I had turned back to go, as I supposed, to my sister; she told me her name was Cordick; I should know the piece of cotton that bundle was wrapped in.


I am son to the prosecutor; I went to look after my sister; I found her at last, at St. Giles's, at a lodging house, in bed with the prisoner; I found the basket and these rags, just as it is now.

How came you to go to that house? - I had her cried, and a girl told me; I was so frightened, I did not ask the woman how she came by my sister; she said she hoped I would not hurt her; the child had no earrings in her ears, and we could not find the frock; I was not present when it was found.


I went out on this search; I was present when the child was found in bed with the prisoner; I took her to the watch-house, and in the morning I went with Mr. Isaacs, and desired him to search her, and in her pockets were the child's earrings; I asked her where the frock was; then she said, I will tell you where the frock is; it is at the corner, at Mr. Lane's; I went there, and saw it.


I searched the prisoner, and found these two gold wires in her pocket; I asked her where the frock was; she said it was at the pawn-broker's in the corner; I went there immediately, and I asked for the frock; they brought it down, and I desired him to keep it.


I am servant to Mr. Lane a pawnbroker; I took in a cotton frock, I believe from the prisoner.

Have you any doubt about it? - Yes; I am not quite sure; I never saw her before, nor since.

Do you believe she is the person? - I believe her to be the person that left it.

When was it you took it from her? - The 5th of March.

Do you know what time of day? - I cannot positively say; I think it was the afternoon.

(The frock produced and deposed to.)

To Mrs. Spencer. Is that the frock your child had on that day? - Yes; I have brought the fellow of it; I have two or three of them; I have no doubt of it.

Sally Spencer . This is the frock my sister had on that day, and I have some more of it.

Mrs. Spencer. They were these, or like these, which my child wore.

Court to Sarah Spencer . Look at that cotton, and see if it was any thing like that which she had the things wrapped up in? - Yes, this is the piece.

MARY HILL sworn.

I am a poor woman; I saw the prisoner bring in the child to a lodging-house in St. Giles's, at one o'clock; I am a lodger there; she had a long cloak on; I could not see whether she had a frock on or not; she said, let my child sit down by the fire; and the people made room for her. She says to the child, shall I get any tea, my dear? the child replies, yes mammy; she said, get it out; I am sure this is the little child; I saw her taken out from the woman.

What time did she bring her in? - As well as I can recollect, between one and two; I did notice the child for the trifle of time she sat in the corner.

Court. How long has she lodged in this house with you? - I never saw her before in my life to my knowledge.


I met the prisoner and the two children in Fetter Lane; she had hold of them by the hand; she crossed over to me, and asked me if my name was Cimmerick; I said yes; she asked me if I knew Mr. Spencer; I said I did; she said Mrs. Spencer was her godmother, and she had borrowed a guinea of her, and had not seen her these four years, and was going to take the children home; she kissed the children, and seemed to be very fond of them.

Court to Mrs. Spencer. What is the value of the things? - The frock is worth 2 s. and the ear-rings 18 d.


I was very much in liquor when I met these children; we had a pint of purl; it was very cold; I asked the children if they would have a drop of purl; I knew them, and my parents lived close by them.

Jury to Mrs. Spencer. Is this woman your god-daughter? - I never saw her in my life.

GUILTY, Of stealing only .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

[Transportation. See summary.]

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-20

Related Material

349. MARY CARROL was indicted for stealing, on the 27th day of March last, a child's cotton frock, value 3 s. the property of William Bigg .

(The Case opened by Mr. Knowlys.)


My child was playing in the court where we live, in a dark cotton frock; it

was about two o'clock in the afternoon; she was there not five minutes before; the prisoner was sitting before the court for two hours before the child was taken away; she was first at one end of the court, and then at the other; first at the broad part, then at the little gate; I saw the prisoner several times when I looked out of the window to look for the child; the child is about three years old.


I know the prisoner; on the 27th of March she was about a quarter of a mile from the prosecutor's; I saw her come by with Mr. Bigg's child in her hand, about ten yards from the court; I asked her where she was going with the child, and she said her mother knew she had got her; I was rather dubious, and came and asked Mrs. Bigg, and she said, Oh, dear, the hussey has got her, that was in the court; she was dressed in a new dark coloured frock.

To Mrs. Bigg. Had you given her leave to take this child? - No, I knew nothing of it.

Did you know the woman before? - No; I had no acquaintance with her; I never saw her after, till she was brought home.


I am father of that child, and husband to that woman; my child had a spotted cotton frock; I have a pattern now in my pocket; on Tuesday, the 27th of March, my little boy came to me, and told me the girl was gone out of the court where I live, which is Hanover-Court, Grub-street; I found the child about three hours after, on the other side of Grub-street; three men were bringing her home, according to a direction which I had written, and which was fixed to her stays, with her name and place of abode, in case she should be lost; her new frock was gone, and her pin-a-fore was put over her stays; on the Sunday following, which was the 1st of April, the child told me she could shew me the way to the naughty woman, and she took me into Moorfields a quarter of a mile, and I found the prisoner with another man's child, and I went home and brought Elizabeth Drake , and we found the prisoner; Mrs. Drake said she was the person; I laid hold of her, and asked her, how came you to take my little child? she said, never say so; she positively denied it.

Mrs. Drake. I am quite sure of the prisoner; the frock was never found.


I apprehended the prisoner; she had a child with her.


I was coming home last Sunday was a week; I had been to an acquaintance of my mother's; there was another girl about three yards distance from me; she had this man's child in her arms; the man saw a girl run away, and the child began to cry out; I went up to the child, and asked where the child lived; the next day the prosecutor came to me and said, the girl that took my child had a striped bed-gown on; I had never another gown but this.


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Court. Mary Carrol , and Hannah Pleasant Jones, you have been convicted of an offence so peculiarly aggravated, that if it came within any of the descriptions which the law has made punishable with death, you certainly would have no mercy to expect from your sovereign. The taking away children from their parents, and afterwards stripping and robbing them, is so extremely dangerous to society, so destructive to domestic peace and happiness, so dreadful in its consequences to the unhappy infants, and so terrible in its nature to the unfortunate parents, who by that means very frequently irrecoverably lose their children, in a way much worse than death, that it deserves to be punished in the

severest manner. If but a single infant can be saved by the terror of your example, and the punishment you are to undergo, (which will not be much better than that of death) the Court will be happy in discharging its duty. Under these circumstances, the sentence of the Court is, that you, and each of you, be

Transported for seven years .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-21
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

350. JOHN PERRYMAS was indicted for stealing, on the 27th day of March last, one woollen hammercloth, value 20 s. the property of Elizabeth Webb , widow .

John Mundy called on his recognizance, and not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-22

Related Material

351. ANN KEMP was indicted for stealing, on the 25th day of February last, three sheets, value 5 s. and one napkin, value 3 d. and one brass candlestick, value 6 d. the property of Robert Ward .

The prisoner lived servant with the prosecutor, and went away, taking the things, which were found upon her, and she confessed stealing them.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-23
VerdictNot Guilty > no prosecutor

Related Material

352. SARAH FIELD was indicted for stealing, on the 14th day of March last, three pint pewter pots, value 3 s. the property of John Gutteridge .

John Gutteridge and John Swan were called on their recognizances, and not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-24
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

353. CATHARINE SMITH was indicted for stealing, on the 25th day of August last, one watch, with the inside and outside cases, both made of silver, value 40 s. the property of Patrick Baxter , privily from his person .


I am a gardener , and live in St. George's parish, near Chelsea . I lost a watch the latter end of August last, in the house I live; I saw it the same night; I lost it about nine; I missed it about five; I slept in the prisoner's room; the next morning when I awoke about five, I missed my watch; the prisoner was there; she was up before me; I asked her whether she had my watch, and she denied it.

Was you sober? - Yes; I was at work that very day.

Was you perfectly sober when you went to bed? - My master had given me some beer when I was at work. I was not drunk, nor I cannot say I was very sober.

Was that the first night you slept in the room? - Yes.

How long had you lodged in that house? - About two years.

How long had she lodged there? - I cannot say; I suppose she had been there a twelvemonth before I lost my watch. I found my watch the 1st of April; I did not take her up at that time.

What did you think of its being gone? - When I asked her for my watch, she threatened me so hard, that I dropped it; she threatened to get a warrant against me for taking away her character; I found it at a public house door, where there were some men quarrelling in the street; it laid on the ground.

Was she there? - She was in the house. There was a man standing by me, and he said, there is a watch on the ground; and we both stooped and picked up the watch, and I knowing the men were quarrelling, I told the man I would keep the watch till we found who dropped it. I put it in my pocket, and told the landlady of it; I did

not know it was my own watch then; I went home, and went to bed, and in the morning, when I awoke, I found the watch to be my own.

When you went into the public house, to say you had found a watch, did you see the prisoner? - Yes; she was in the house; I did not tell her I had found it; I told the woman of the house.

Had this woman continued to lodge in the same house, from the time you had lost the watch, till the 1st of April? - Yes, she did. I went away about two months since; I left the house before Christmas last.

Had you any intimacy after this? - No. The 2d of April, which was Monday, I took up the prisoner; I charged her with it; she said she picked it up in the bed, two or three days afterwards.

Whereabouts in the room had you left the watch, when you went to bed? - I did not undress myself at all; I kept on my cloaths, and laid down on the bed. I have got the watch here.

(Produced and deposed to.)

Did you search the bed the morning you missed it? - No, I did not.

Was she undressed? - No.


I lost the watch when the prosecutor found it. I bought the watch of the prisoner, and gave her 1 l. 18 s. for it; I had it about four months or more; I did not hear him talk about the watch at all; I did not see him pick it up.

Prosecutor. I did not know that this man dropped the watch till the next day; it was a stranger that was with me.

Do you know the watch again? - Yes, I think I do.

Look at the watch; is it the watch you bought of her? - Yes, this is the watch.

When you bought it of her, did she tell you how she came by it? - She said a young man that had come out of the country had left the duplicate with her; and if he did not return in such a time, she might release the watch, and sell it.


The latter end of last October, I picked up a duplicate of a watch, and I shewed it to a great many people in the neighbourhood that I do not know, and they persuaded me to have it raffled for; others persuaded me to sell it out and out; I could not do either, because I did not know the pawn-broker. A person informed me of the pawn-broker; I enquired if it was their duplicate, and they told me it was; I spoke to several people to raffle for the watch; two or three people that work for me, persuaded me to sell the watch out and out, and Rourke said he wanted to buy a watch; he went with me to buy it; my husband has been here all day.

GUILTY Of stealing, but not privily .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-25
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

354. PETER PIPER was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John Wake , about the hour of eleven in the night, on the 13th day of March , and burglariously stealing therein eight copper saucepans, value 30 s. one large copper, value 10 s. eighty pounds weight of pickled pork, value 30 s. and one large copper pot, value 1 s. his property .

JOHN WAKE sworn.

I live at Bromley St. Leonard, in Middlesex ; on the 13th of March last I went to bed at ten, as I usually do; I was not the last up; in the morning I got up about five, or a little after; I did not look at the kitchen; I told the maid to come down; she was the first that informed me; says she, O Lord, here is my cotton gown gone, and all the kitchen furniture; on the outside kitchen door there was a glass, and

bolts; they had broke the glass, and unbolted the bolts.

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Counsel. Does your maid fit up later than you? - No, I never suffer that.

Was you as sober that night, as you are now? - I do believe I was.


I live at Mr. Wake's; I am the maidservant.

Who was last up in the family, on the 13th of March, the night the house was broke open? - My master and me.

What time did you go to bed? - About a quarter past ten.

Were all the doors and windows fast? - When I went down in the morning, the under bolt was undone, and the top bolt bolted, and the glass broke; I imagine they put their hand through the glass, and bolted it after they came out; they could reach to that bolt.

Was there no other door but that glass door? - No.

What did you miss? - A copper, and eight copper saucepans, a small tin one, ten stone of pork, a stew-pan, five dishes, a cistern, a crook, a boiling-pot, and some small articles beside; I missed the kitchen furniture, and on Monday Mr. Edward Mee found the man in the fields.


I am a pot-ash manufacturer; on the 15th of March I was at my manufactory and mustard-mills on Bow Common; Thomas Rood , in a field across the common, beckoned to me; seeing him discoursing with a man with a bag on his shoulders, I run towards him; when I came within twenty yards of him, I heard the man make use of the expressions, the first that comes near me, I will stab them; after he repeated these words, I went towards him, and he threw down the bag; they were coppers, and things that rattled; he ran away, and I ran after him, about a mile and a half; I was quite knocked up, and crossing the road I called to some others to stop him; I came up and took him; they could not assist me; I took him myself about a mile back; when we got to the middle of the common, he asked me to let him go; I told him no; I was looking behind, to beckon some of my men to my assistance; he said, b - st your eyes, let me go, and he gave me a knock on the side, and I returned it; and he being too powerful, I fell down, and brought him down with me; I laid hold of his trowsers with my hands; he then said, d - n your eyes, I will murder you, and he got up; he run away; I followed, and he said, if you come a yard forward, I will cut your throat; he pulled a knife out of his pocket; I believe it was sharp, I did not see the blade of it; some people were coming; he ran near a mile and a half, or two miles; I got assistance; and followed him to Old Ford, and crossing one field, just at once I lost sight of him; I said to the persons that were pursuing him with me, as there was a mob, I am sure he is not far off, for I have but this moment lost sight of him; with that we searched the hedges, and found him hid in the hedge; I then told the people that were round me, that if they would assist me to the watch-house I would give them half-a-crown, if they would assist me to bring him back; Mr. Rood stood with the property, which he threw off his shoulders; I spoke to the constable of Bromley; I said it was necessary to have a watch over the watch-house; and in the morning I found him removed to Bow watch-house.

Do you know what this bag contained? - When I came back to Thomas Rood, they shewed me these things; they were pewter dishes, copper saucepans, a stew-pan, and ten earthen plates.

Mr. Garrow. So there was a time in this contest when you was undermost, and this man's foot upon you? - Yes.

You found afterwards he had a knife? - Yes.

He did not use his knife? - No, there was not time.


I saw the prisoner in the morning of the 15th of March, picking greens in the field, Green Cole, at the bottom of Bow Common; it was about a quarter after eleven; a field belonging to Mr. Mann; I asked him what he was doing there; he said he was picking a few greens; I said, you shall not take them out of the field, and he said he would; have you ploughed the land, or sowed the greens? then I looked round, and saw Mr. Mee at a little distance, and I beckoned him to come and assist me; I said something to him; says he, I will stab you; he had a sack with him, on his left shoulder, and when he saw Mr. Mee coming to me, he threw it down, and said I might take it and be d - d, and he ran away.

Had you asked him any thing about the sack before? - No.

What was in the sack? - Five pewter dishes, seven large plates, and three small ones; there were three copper saucepans, a tin one, a stew-pan, a copper pot, and a quantity of kitchen furniture; Mee pursued him; I stood by the things; I took the things to the very first house I met with, that was a public house at Mount Pleasant; I left them with the landlord, his name is Horn, on the same day that I took them; he dropped them from his back.

What day was this? - On the 16th of March, to the best of my remembrance.

What day of the week was it? - On the Thursday; the next morning, I took them to the rotation office; they opened them before the justice, and they were tied up and sealed; I left them at the office; the prisoner was there; he was examined before the justice; he said he lodged somewhere down at the ruins at Limehouse.

Was his examination taken down in writing? - I believe it was.

Mr. Garrow. What business are you? - I am a bricklayer's labourer.

Was you at work in that part? - Yes.

What had you to do in this field? - A gentleman gave me so much a week to look over that field.

Then you was not at work as a bricklayer's labourer? - Then I was watching the field for a draught of beer.

And the dispute between you and this man was, whether he should cut three greens or no? - That was all.

How long was he in the field cutting them, from your first observing him? - About five minutes.

You was some time disputing too? - Yes.

This man absolutely insisted he would cut the greens? - Yes.

Had he his knife out cutting them? - Yes.

If he would have given up his purpose in cutting greens, he might have gone off? - Certainly.

Did not he tell the Magistrate that he came into the field to cut a few roots, and that in this field he found this sack? - I heard him say nothing about the sack.

Are you sober now? - Yes, I am.

Did you hear what this man said before the Justice? - I cannot mind what he said; he said nothing where he lodged.

Are you a bricklayer's labourer now? - No, I be not.

Are you out of work now? - No.

Are you sure this was on the 16th? - Yes, pretty sure of that.

Are you sure it was on the Thursday? - Yes, I think it was the Thursday, and I think it was the 16th.


These things were left in my custody; they are here; Rood brought them to the office.

(The things produced, and deposed to by the servant.)

Court to Prosecutor. How far is your house from Bow Common? - Pretty near half a mile.


They were hid in the field; they were perfectly covered over with the greens; I

was going through the path-way, and saw them some distance from the path-way, and two men came up.

Court to Miller. Was it day-light when you came down in the morning? - It was between five and six; it had been daylight some time before.

You had heard no alarm before that? - No.

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

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

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-26
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

355. ELIZABETH GIDNEY was indicted for stealing, on the 26th day of March last, one featherbed, value 20 s. one pair of bellows, value 18 d. one footman, value 6 d. and one sheet, value 6 d. the property of John Hayley .


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-27
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

356. FRANCES LEE was indicted for stealing, on the 4th of April , one fustian coat, value 10 s. two woollen waistcoats, value 4 s. the property of John Christie .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-28

Related Material

357. RICHARD CUNNINGHAM was indicted for stealing, on the 3d day of March last, one silk handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of Richard Carpenter Smith , Esq.


On Saturday, the 3d of March, as I was going down Fish-street Hill , a person tapped me on the shoulder; and I turned round, and saw he had hold of the prisoner by the collar; at his feet lay this handkerchief; I took him into the constable's house; he said to the prisoner, I have warned you of this several times.


I am a victualler; I was coming down Fish-street Hill; I stopped to speak to a butcher; he said, do you not see how busy the pick pockets are? them two men are after that gentleman, and I will be after them; I saw the prisoner put his hand into Mr. Smith's pocket, and pull out a handkerchief; I took the prisoner by the collar, and he dropt the handkerchief; I then touched Mr. Smith on the shoulder, and said, you have lost your handkerchief; Mr. Smith looked at it, and said, this is my handkerchief; I picked it up myself off the curb stone.


I had been looking for work at a tobacconist's, and upon Fish-street Hill. I had been at another tobacconist's; and there was a tall jockey, who might have picked the gentleman's pocket, who threw the handkerchief at me, and the man Mabs took me.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-29
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

358. MARY STRICKLAND was indicted for feloniously assaulting Alice Inglish on the king's highway, on the 14th of April , and putting her in corporal fear and danger of her life, and feloniously taking from her person, and against her will, a woman's wollen cloak, value 5 s. the property of John Inglish .


On Saturday night last I had been to market, and returning, I saw two or three women of the town; and my husband was leaning against a post, and the prisoner came and struck me, about twelve at night, and tore my bonnet off my head, and struck me a second time, and tore my cloak from off my shoulders.


On Saturday night last, at twelve o'clock, I heard a noise; I went out towards where the noise was, and the prosecutrix gave me charge of a woman; not the prisoner, but another woman; the croud was so great, and not having any assistance, I could not tell what to do.


Hearing the rattle spring, I ran to Macdonald's assistance; I saw the bonnet drop between the prisoner and Mrs. Inglish; the prosecutrix gave charge of the prisoner for taking her cloak and bonnet; I did not see the prisoner drop the bonnet or cloak; they had come 200 yards from the place where the affray happened; I know no more.

Prisoner. What charge did the prosecutrix give? - For robbing her, and beating her.


I heard the rattle spring in Long Lane; I went to the assistance of the party, and asked what was the matter, and I saw the prosecutrix all over blood, and the prisoner was charged for robbing John Inglish of a handkerchief.


I was going up Long Lane, and there was a mob; the prosecutrix was very much in liquor, and tore every body she came near, and said she had lost her cloak, and she would take me up for it.


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-30

Related Material

359. EDWARD ANDERSON was indicted for stealing, on the 17th day of April , one man's linen frock, called a smock frock, value 3 s. a woollen jacket, value 5 s. the property of John Edwards .


On the 17th of this month, between six and seven in the evening, I was informed my door was robbed; I live in Barbican ; the things were hung at the outside of the door; I am a salesman .


On Saturday last I was in the shop, and I thought I saw the things at the door move; I came to the door directly, and a woman informed me we were robbed.


I saw a man snatch the things, and go off with them.

( John Negus the Constable produced the things.)

Prisoner. I am innocent.

The prisoner called one witness to his character.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-31

Related Material

360. MARY GREEN was indicted for stealing, on the 9th of March last, one china tea-pot, with a cover, and a silver spout, value 5 s. six tea-cups and saucers, value 5 s. 6 d. the property of Hannah Corrack , widow , and Robert Corrack .


I am partner with my mother; I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, on Monday evening, the 9th of March last, about half after nine, I was up at tea with my mother; I only speak to the property.

- BROWN sworn.

I am servant to the prosecutor; on Monday evening, the 9th of March last, I was standing at the door, and the prisoner came in, and asked for a penny bason; I went to the back part of the shop, to fetch a bason, and when I returned, I missed the china tea-pot, with a silver spout; I missed neither cups nor saucers; the prisoner paid me a penny for the bason, and went out; I rung for my master, and ran and caught the prisoner by the cloak; she asked me what she had done; she came back, and said she knew nothing of it; by the time I got to the door, my master came down stairs, and me and my master saw the prisoner shoot the property out of her apron on the counter; the things are my master's.

(Deposed to.)


I went in to buy a bason, and the young man shoved me against the counter.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-32
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

361. JOHN COLEMAN , otherwise SCHOOLEY , was indicted for feloniously assaulting William Stephenson , on the 26th of December , putting him in fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person, and against his will, one watch, made of silver, value 2 l. 2 s. two guineas and a half, value 2 l. 12 s. 6 d. a silver crown piece, value 5 s. a foreign coin, called a dollar, value 4 s. and two shillings in monies, his property .


I was robbed the night after Christmas night, in Old-street , about six in the evening; I had been in the City Road, but I was going home, and in Old-street I was knocked down; I did not see any body before I was knocked down; the prisoner came behind me; my watch and money was taken; I lost two guineas and a half in gold, a crown piece, a dollar, and two shillings in silver; I cannot be positive which of the men took it from me; there were three of them; I knew the two that were tried before; I cannot swear to the prisoner; the three men that robbed me were taken before Mr. Staples, and he ordered them here; I cannot say I know what became of them after they robbed me; they ran away from me.

How soon was this man taken afterwards? - It might be a fortnight after; I cannot positively say; there was no property found on this man.


I believe the prisoner to be the man that struck me when I assisted my brother.

Was you with him when he was robbed? - Yes, but not when he was knocked down; I was a little before him; I went to him; I saw Walker take the watch out of his pocket; my brother was laid on the ground, and three men beating him.

Had you light enough to see who the three men were? - It was not dark; there was a little snow on the ground; it was so light that I did know them again; the snow made it lighter; the lamps were lighted; I had light to know some of them again; I believe this is the man; I cannot swear to him; but I believe he is the man that struck me; but I am not sure of it.


I apprehended the prisoner; I found nothing on him.

Court. There is no evidence to convict this man of a capital felony.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-33
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

362. JANE TYLER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 15th day of January last, six guineas, value 6 l. 6 s. the monies of Henry Matthews , in his dwelling house .


I am a victualler , in Gray's-inn-lane ; I lost my money, on the 15th of January; six guineas out of a little box in a chest of drawers, which stood in the one pair of stairs where I lay; I saw the money that very morning about twelve; I put a guinea or two to it out of my pocket, which caused me to see it; I missed it the next day; I never found it again; the prisoner came to me as a servant, the 2d of January, and she left me on the 15th; she never had any wages, nor returned again till the 3d of March; then she came to me and cried, and acknowledged the fact; I made enquiry for three or four days, and I thought no more about it; I did not want to see her any more; then she came to acknowledge it, then I thought it best to take her up.

Did she restore you any part of the money? - No.

What account did she give you of it? - She said, she had spent it, and bought herself some gowns and shifts.


I am not guilty; my father sent to him, and offered him two guineas in part, when he heard of my being in prison; he said he would not take it, but he would take four; and if I would put it into a place, he would come into Court, and tell them it was mislaid.

Court to prosecutor. Did you say any thing of that kind? - No, I did not; her father applied to my daughter, and she said I might make it as easy as I could, if she could return any part of the money.

GUILTY , Death .

She was humbly recommended to mercy by the prosecutor, having children of his own.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-34
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

363. JAMES BROWN was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Ninns , about the hour of seven in the night, on the 26th day of February last, with intent his goods then and there being burglariously and feloniously to steal .


I live at No. 1, Hanover-court, Grub-street ; on the 26th of February I was at home; at seven in the evening, Elizabeth Drake , a lodger of mine, and my wife went out and left me at home; about five minutes after, a little boy of mine came in and said, daddy, there is a man in the passage; the child is about twelve years old; accordingly I went down stairs, and put the child out of the door, and bid him go to a neighbour's opposite and stay there; the prisoner was on the outside of the door then; the door was open; I withdrew and went to the further end of the passage, and I no sooner got there, but the prisoner came in and tried a key to the parlour door about a minute; he then went out and came in again immediately, and repeated that four or five different times; he tried the key each time; I was not six feet from him all the time, and I think the fourth or fifth time that he tried, Mrs. Elizabeth Drake came to the door and stopped him; then I took him.


I went out with Mrs. Ninns, and shut the street door after us upon the latch, and latched it.

Are you sure you shut it after you? - Yes.

Who shut it? - I did.

You pulled it to? - Yes, very hard indeed; I went away directly.


I went out with Elizabeth Drake; she pulled it very hard, and I said, have you shut the door? and she tried it; and I looked back and saw her try it.

Court. She does not say that, we cannot

take more from you than what she says herself.

You did not try it yourself? - No.


I was sent for by the prosecutor to take charge of the prisoner; and the prosecutor gave me this key, which he said he found in the parlour door; I took this other key out of his pocket, and this bag, a large bag, and nothing in the bag; the key I found in his pocket is a fair key, but the other is not. (A pick-lock key, with open wards.)

Prosecutor. I took that key out of the parlour door.

Prisoner. He found no key in my pocket.

Court. What o'clock was it? - It was exactly two minutes after seven when he came into the entry; I looked at my watch; there was no day-light; it was quite dark before that.


(Read by Thomas Shelton, Esq; Clerk of the Arraigns.)

"That the prisoner, as he was going to see a young woman, at a Mrs. Lowe's, No. 2, Philip's-court, Grub-street; mistook the court, and went into No. 2, Hanover-court, in the same street, both courts adjoining; when he went into the passage, he was accosted by a child, who asked him what he wanted; he replied, No. 2, Philip's-court; when he found his mistake; it being then the hour of seven of the clock in the evening, of the 26th of January last, and it being then dark, which was the cause of his mistake; he returned out of the house; as he got better than half way down the court, a man came up to him, and collared him, and made mention of many opprobrious language, and called him a thief, and accused him of being in a strange house, and said he wanted to rob some apartment in the said house, and kept him in custody, until he sent for an officer, and sent him to the Poultry Compter, and would not listen to any thing he could say on his own behalf. Such irregular and arbitrary proceedings have been too often practised by designing persons, merely for the sake of having a reward.

The prisoner is a young man of reputable parents, who will step forward on his trial to give him a character; he therefore humbly submits his case to your Lordship's interference, soliciting the favour of your Lordship's influence in his behalf.

GUILTY , Death .

The prisoner called one witness to his character.

He was humbly recommended to mercy by the Jury.

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-35

Related Material

364. WILLIAM WILSON , and JAMES THOMPSON , alias ROBINSON, alias ROBERTSON were indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Jane Combrune , widow , about the hour of one in the night, of the 15th of March last, and burglariously stealing therein, a silver tea-spoon, value 1 s. two silver salt spoons, value 2 s. three silver castor tops, value 3 s. the property of the said Jane; and one silver tea-spoon, value 1 s. the property of Mary Carpenter , spinster.

(The case opened by Councel.)


I am servant to Mrs. Combrune, who lives at Hackney, at Upper Hammerton ; her house joins to the church field; on the 14th of March last, I was at home; I made the house fast at night; and got up in the morning at half after six; I was knocked up in the morning, by some men going to work; when I came down, I found the locks wrenched off the two parlour doors; the back parlour window shutters wrenched off; it was wrenched open on the outside; the inside shutters were wrenched off; there are no outside shutters; the persons got in that way; there are two parlour locks; they were broke; and there were lost two silver

salt spoons, three tea-spoons and some silver tops of crewets; there was one tea-spoon and one crewet, in the kitchen; and two tea-spoons and the two salt spoons in the parlour; I saw them the night before; I was the last person up the over night; the house was all safe when I went to bed.

How did they get into the garden? - There is a garden door, we found the lock wrenched.


I formerly was a watchman, but having a swelled face, and not able to do my duty, I was not a watchman at the time these men were taken; on the 15th of March, I got up to go to work at half past five, within a minute over or under, and going to work, when I came to the watch-box, at the end of Mourning-lane, which is about 150 or 200 yards from church-field, I asked the watchman why he was not off; for five used to be the time of going off; he told me five men had been about the town, and they had orders not to quit their stand till six; and while I was speaking to him, I heard the footsteps of men, and I said, here they come; and I saw five men coming from Hammerton, down Mourning-lane, into Hackney, straight from the lady's house; one of them, I am positive, is Wilson; my face was within a quarter of a yard of Wilson's face; I leaned on a post, and there was just room enough for a man to come through; it was half past five, and day light quite sufficient to see a man's face.

Did you know Wilson before? - I never saw him before to my knowledge; when these men had passed me, I said to the watchman, these are the men, it is necessary we should follow them; I said, you follow them that way; I will go round and get some more watchmen; I went round by Saint Thomas's square; I heard the rattles, and ran after them, and just about a quarter of a mile I could see them; I made up to the man with the rattle, and we pursued them, and came up with some men at Kingsland, but I could not say they were the same; there we had information of them; I saw them at the back of Pigwell-field; we heard they were gone to Newington-green; I pursued them till we came to Clerkenwell; when we came into the street, I went into a house and saw Collins; these two men were taken about half after six; I was not present; I saw Wilson after he was taken at the publick-house; I am quite sure he is the same man.

How was he? - He seemed very much fatigued with his journey, and very much dirtied with running across the fields; he seemed all of a sweat; I know nothing of the other prisoners.


I am a watchman in Mourning-lane, Hackney; on the 15th of March last, in the morning, five men came down the lane; we had strong suspicion of them; we pursued after them; as soon as I began to run, the men run; I can swear to Robert Collins, but not to the others; two were taken in Goswell-street; one James Robinson , I think his name was; they were the two prisoners that were taken in Goswell-street; I lost sight of them for above half an hour; I cannot be sure to any but Collins.


I joined in the pursuit of five men in Hackney; I saw them before me in Mare-street, but I did not see their faces.

Was you present when Thompson was apprehended? - I might be about 100 yards from him; then I went up to him and saw a pistol taken from him; I heard nothing said.


I can swear to one of them, that is Robinson; I saw him when they were taken, and I saw him at Hackney, against the brew-house; there were five men; I was standing with the watchmen when they came by; the watchman asked me to go with him; I went.

Are you sure that Robinson was one of the men you saw come by? - Yes, and

I was present when he was stopped; I saw the pistol taken out of his pocket; William Walker took it out; I did not hear any thing said.

Prisoner Thompson. Ask him whether he knew me before the Justice? - I did not swear to him then; I was not called in; I did not know the first time they were before the Justice, that there was any robbery.


I live along with Mr. Fish and Gates, tobacconists, Saint John Street; on the 15th of March I was coming to work, and I heard the cry of stop thief; I saw this Robinson come across Black-pudding-street, into Little Sutton-street; he was taken and searched, and there was a pistol flung in the small of his back, loaded with three slugs.

(Pistol produced.)

Was the pistol primed? - Yes, he said we are only playing the rogue, one running after another; so when Frost came up, he said, these are the men we have chased; at the publick-house he sat down on the side of the place; he asked for a handkerchief to wipe his face, and I lent him one; he said now we are got into Christians hands, but if we had been taken at Hackney, we should have been massacred.


In the morning of the 15th of March, I was going to work between six and seven; and in Sutton-street, or in Cross-street, which is close by it, I saw this Robinson come running by; I heard the cry of stop thief, and attempted to take him, he said, it is nothing but a joke, let me go; but seeing him with a large stick and dirty boots; I tried to stop him; I thought if he was an honest man, it would not hurt him; and if he was a rogue, I would detect him; I fell down and got up and pursued him, and he finding I pursued him, he lifted up his stick and attempted to strike me; I kept fast hold of him; Walker came up, and we took him back to the end of Cross-street, and found a pistol in his pocket, which was behind the back of his coat; he did not strike me; he lifted up his stick, which I suppose was to make an attempt; I cannot tell who stopped Wilson; we went to the public house, the corner of Sutton-street; there he said, he was glad he had got into the hands of Christians, for had they been taken in Hackney, they should have been massacred; somebody beside Wilson was taken to prison; Thompson took hold of Frost by the collar, and said, you must not be saucy, you are not in the country now.


On the 15th of March, about a quarter after six in the morning, I heard the cry of stop thief; I was just gone into my counting-house, and I opened my garden door, and I saw the man in the blue coat, Wilson, in company with another in a brown coat, run by me close; there were another or two in pursuit of them seemingly; they run down the ruins down a hill; in going along, the man in the brown coat, in company with the man in the blue coat, threw some things over the charter-house-wall at twice, which he took out of his pocket, and they appeared to me to look like silver, but to be sure I could not tell; I was afraid to stop them, though I believe I could have taken the man in the brown coat, Robinson, at my parlour window; it was the other that is not here that I saw throw the things over the wall; the prisoner was carried to a publick house; I told the patrol I was sure that one of them threw some things over the wall.

Court. Are you sure that the man in the blue coat was in company with the man that threw the things over the Charter-house-wall? - Yes, and they had both boots on, and seemed very dirty with country mud.


I am gardener to the Charter-house; I searched the garden on the 15th, and found nothing; the day after I found three

tops of crewets, a pair of salt spoons and two odd tea-spoons; I found them in the lower part of the garden, near Saint John's-street; I took them to the Justice's.

Neave. To the best of my recollection, I suppose it might be about a dozen yards from Wilderness-row; that is the place within a yard or two, where I saw the man throw over the things.


I am clerk to Mr. Blackborow.

When did you get these things from Weeden, the gardener? - The 16th; they have been locked up ever since.


Mary Carpenter . I swear to this spoon which was in the house the night before the robbery.

What do you swear to this spoon by? - By the mark, I. F.

Mrs. COMBRUNE sworn.

One of the spoons has a cypher; the other has not; I swear to that with a cypher; I lost some tops of crewets, but I cannot swear to them.


I was waiting for the time to get into my mistress's garden, and while I was waiting, the two prisoners and two more men came past; I never lost them out of my sight for above a minute, till they were taken; I pursued them, and I asked the man if he was able to run any further; he said, he could not go any further; I run down to the City-gardens, and at the bottom of the City-gardens, I got sight of them again, and I called out stop thief, and I pursued, and came to them in about a minute and half, or a couple of minutes, after they were stopped, the man in the white coat, Robinson, was stopped first; I left him, and I met a man that had hold of Wilson; he delivered him to me; I examined Wilson, and I took this wrench and the stock of a center bit out of his pocket; his boots were all over dirt.

Prisoner Robinson. When you was at the Justice's, did not you say you did not know me? - Both of them are the same men that I pursued all the way across the fields, down to the City-gardens, and across the dead part of the wall, while I went into Red Lyon-street.

- LUCY sworn.

I went to this Lady's house, and compared the crow to Mrs. Combrune's garden gate, and it fitted the part that had been broke, the wood work was broke and dented in very much, and this fitted; and I tried it likewise to the back parlour window, and the large end fitted the window exactly; at the small end withinside the parlour, is a brass lock, and an impression had been made to force off the lock; and the small end fits in the brass work of the lock; every part that was forced, one part or the other fitted.

It is not a common crow, I believe? - It is what is commonly made use of in that business.

Prisoner Wilson. I know nothing at all of the affair; I found some things going through Islington; I know nothing of this young man, nor he of me.


I was running in the streets, and these people stopped me; I run with others; I said, I was going about my business; they took me to the publick house, and brought this young man to me; I never saw him before; we were cleared of the robbery before the Justice, that we were.

When were these men committed? - They were committed the 15th, but our evidence was not compleat.


GUILTY , Death .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-36
SentenceCorporal > private whipping

Related Material

365. ANN HARRIS was indicted for stealing, on the 29th day of March last, a quart pewter pot, value 12 d. and case knife, value 2 d. the property of Edward Brand .

The prisoner was taken with the knife and pot in her pocket.


Privately Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-37

Related Material

366. JOHN DAVIS was indicted for stealing, on the 9th day of March last, a wooden cask, value 4 d. and 56 lb. weight of butter, salted, value 30 s. the property of Jasper Holmes and Co.

The butter was found in the apartment from whence the prisoner came out, it was concealed under a cloak, and the prisoner and another man were seen directly after the robbery near the spot, with each a firkin of butter.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-38

Related Material

367. JAMES PRICE was indicted for stealing, on the 9th day of March , one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of William Astell .

The prosecutor saw the prisoner and another man come and walk close to his side, and he saw the prisoner throw his handkerchief to the other person; he secured the prisoner directly.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-39
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

368. DENNIS CARTY was indicted for stealing, on the 19th day of April , one piece of Irish linen cloth, value 30 s. the property of Joseph Hodgson , privily in his shop .

A witness saw a man go out of Mr. Hodgson's back door, with something under his jacket, he followed him, and it was the prisoner with the cloth.

GUILTY Of stealing but not privately .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-40

Related Material

369. JOHN DAVIS was indicted for stealing, on the 20th of April , one stone breast buckle, set in silver, value 4 s. and two stone stock buckles, set in silver, value 6 s. the property of Samuel Moses .

James Phillips saw the prisoner at the prosecutor's shew glass, and he was taken soon after with the breast buckle on him, which the prosecutor swore to by particular marks.


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-41

Related Material

370. JOHN SELBY was indicted for stealing on the 11th day of March last, two glass decanters, value 10 d. one pint of brandy, value 12 d. and one pint of shrub, value 12 d. the property of Benjamin Painter .

The prosecutor saw the prisoner take the decanters off the counter.


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-42
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

371. WILLIAM SHIPTON was indicted for stealing, on the 5th of March last, one cloth great coat, value 4 s. the property of Robert Fitton .

There was no evidence against the prisoner.


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-43
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

372. ESTHER THORNTON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th of January last, three half guineas, value 1 l. 11 s. 6 d. sixteen half crowns, value 40 s. and 30 s. in monies numbered, the property of Thomas Murphy , in the dwelling house of Francis Riley .


I am a mat-maker ; my wife was robbed; the prisoner was taken the 25th of February, at Kennington gravel-pits.


In January last, I was robbed of upwards of five pounds; there was sixteen half crowns, three half guineas in gold, and the rest in shillings and sixpences; I was brought to bed but two days; the girl that I had came to my bed side, and took my pocket from under my head, and run down stairs, that was the prisoner; I saw her do it; I screamed out; I could not run after her; I did not know her till my husband hired her in Spital-fields, as a weekly servant; she was taken a month after she went away, on the 25th of February; I never recovered any of my money.

How came you to keep all your money in your pocket? - The man that worked for me was coming in and out, and I was obliged to give change; I was obliged to keep my money in my pocket; it was all the money I had in the world; I saw her take this and I screamed out; I could not follow her; I am sure the money was in my pocket; I had it not a quarter of an hour before; I had it in my hand, and put it in my pocket, and the prisoner saw me with the money in my hand; I set up during the time; I keep two men to hawk my mats.

Prisoner. I lived with that woman three months; I never took away her money, nor robbed her of any thing; and I went away of a Friday, and they came to me and said I had robbed them.

Court to prosecutor. In whose house do you live? - No. 2, Saint Giles's; the house of Francis Riley .

GUILTY , Death .

She was humbly recommended to mercy to save her life, being only fifteen.

The Court ordered the prosecutor an allowance of five pounds.

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-44

Related Material

373. MARGARET WOOD was indicted for feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Edward Harrold , about the hour of three in the afternoon, on the 10th of March , no person being therein, and feloniously stealing therein, four linen sheets, value 5 s. two child's cotton frocks, value 2 s. three shirts, value 4 s. a tablecloth, value 1 s. two pair of stockings, value 2 s. a cheque apron, value 1 s. a child's corded dimity cloak, value 3 s. a ditto, value 6 d. a coat, value 6 d. his property .


I am wife of Edward Harrold ; I live at No. 22, Lambeth-hill ; I was in the upper part of the house where the robbery was committed, about three in the afternoon; I had locked the door and taken the key in my pocket; I was speaking to a neighbour in the upper part of the house; she informed me of a woman going out of the house, with some things in her

apron; I have only one room in the house; I was not in my own room, I was moving out; upon that information I came down stairs, and found my doors open, and part of my things gone; my door was not broke, but had been undone with a key.

What did you miss? - I went out, about 100 yards off, I saw a woman with some things in her apron; I caught hold of her and brought her back, and a man came up to my assistance with the alarm of the neighbours; there were in her apron, two pair of sheets, two cloaks, one tablecloth, one apron, two child's frocks, and one child's coat; that woman was the prisoner; I am sure of it; the man secured her, and took the apron with the things of her, and took her into the publick house, and examined her; the man has the things here.


On the 10th of March there was a cry of stop thief; I was directed up the Old Change, and this prosecutrix had got hold of the prisoner, charging her with taking her things; she ned found to me, and let some of them said in the dirt; so I drew her apron strings, and tied them all together; I took her to the publick house, and in her pocket I found a bunch of picklock keys, about a dozen, and a chissel.

(The things deposed to.)

What is your husband's name? - Edward Harrold .

Mr. Peatt, prisoner's Councel. You was in an upper room? - Yes, speaking to an opposite neighbour; I pursued the prisoner, in about ten minutes after, I saw her in the Old Change; she dropped some of the things and stooped to pick them up; I never lost sight of her from the time I saw her to the time I took her; I found the things in her apron.

The prisoner called seven witnesses, who all gave her a very good character.

GUILTY , Death .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-45

Related Material

374. BENJAMIN GREGSON was indicted for falsly and feloniously making, forging and counterfeiting, and causing and procuring to be falsly made, forged and counterfeited, and willingly acting and assisting in the false making, forging and counterfeiting, on the 14th of December, 1785 , an acceptance to a certain paper writing, purporting to be a bill of Exchange, with the name Benjamin Gregson thereto subscribed, dated at London, the 14th of December, 1785; directed to John Buckley , Esq; No. 266, Bermondsey-street, Southwark, for the sum of 30 l. which acceptance is as follows:


"J. Buckley," with intention to defraud Benjamin Ward .

A second count. For uttering the same, with the like intention.


I produce a note of hand which I received of the prisoner, about the 14th of January, 1785, I am a watchmaker.

How came you to receive it? - The prisoner gave me orders for goods to the amount of 60 l. or 70 l. in which he gave me this in part of payment for goods he took away, they were not all compleated when he took some of them away; prior to his giving me this bill, I had been in company with him two or three times, it was ready drawn, and a letter came with it with recommendations, signifying Mr. Buckley wished me to use him well; at the time he delivered the note to me, the acceptance was upon it, the letter came to me sealed up, I opened it, and read it before him, it did not inclose the note, I do not recollect now whether the note was inclosed in the letter, or whether it came separate.

(The bill read, and examined by Mr. Knowlys, Prisoner's Councel.)

"30, London, Dec. 14th, 1785. Two

"months after date pay to my order 30 l.

"value received, Benjamin Gregson . To

" John Buckley , Esq. No. 266, Bermondsey

"street, Borough. Accepted J. Buckley."


I am clerk to Mr. John Buckley, he lives in Bermondsey-street, No. 266.

Is there any other Mr. John Buckley , in Bermondsey street? - No.

Did he live there in December 1785? - Yes.

Look at that bill and that acceptance, is that your master's hand? - No, my Lord, I have seen this bill before, I am confidently sure.

Was you his only clerk at his house at that time? - Yes, his brother who acts as clerk, is James Buckley .

Do you know whether that was his brother's writing or your writing? - No, it is not, it was not accepted by the house.

Mr. Knowlys. How long have you lived with Mr. Buckley? - Two years, the 4th of next June.

Mr. Buckley is in a great way of business? - Yes.

How many clerks does he keep? - Only me and his brother, I was never allowed to accept any of his bills, but his brother does, by procuration, sometimes accept bills for him.

How are you employed in the house? - As clerk keeping his books; and going out with bills for acceptance.

How many offices have you in this house? only one Compting-house.

Is not the Compting-house divided into several parts? - There is a partition lately made, Mr. Buckley sits on one side of the desk, and I on the other, the partition does not separate us.

Does Mr. Buckley do much of the business himself, or does he leave it chiefly to his brother and you? - He does it chiefly himself.

Who takes the accounts mostly? - I take all the accounts of bills, I keep them myself, go with them for acceptance, and bring them back, they go chiefly through my hands.

The writing part of the business is done chiefly by yourself and his brother? - Yes, in keeping the books, and entering the bills.

Then Mr. Buckley does not write much in the compting-house? - Not in entering bills, but accepting and addressing bills to his bankers.

You do not of course often see him write? - Frequently see him write some business that we contract together, I am obliged to see him write his name, for instance, at the Custom-house, when he contracts for wool; Mr. John Buckley I speak of, Mr. James is lame, and never goes out.

There is a number on that bill, 2398? - Yes.

To Ward. Who was the bill presented to you by? - The prisoner.

Was the bill, at the time it was presented, the same figures and words you see there? - I cannot say as to this number, I do not know it was there, for any thing I know this bill came to me in the same shape it is now, except the indorsement.

Court. Where has it been ever since? - I paid it away to a gentleman in the city, and it came back to me from that gentleman I paid it to.

Is that gentleman here? - No, I indorsed it before I paid it, my indorsement is here now.

Was you paid any part of the 60 l. or 70 l.? - I had this bill for 28 l. part of it.

Mr. Knowlys. I submit they have not set out the same bill that is in the indictment, they are bound to set it out as it is here.

Court. It is stated in the indictment as it was presented to him.

Prisoner. I have nothing to say in respect to the bill, any further than I am totally innocent of it, I never saw Benjamin Ward in my life on the business.

Court to Prosecutor. Are you perfectly sure of the prisoner? - Yes, I am quite sure of him, I had been in his company three or four times before that.

GUILTY , Death .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-46
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

375. JACOB JONAS was indicted for stealing, on the 13th day of April , 26 lb. weight of congou tea, value 4 l. one paper bag, value 1 d. the property of Edward Eagleton , in the house of John Payne .


On the 13th of this month we cleared a great quantity of tea, between thirty and forty chests, part of which our people were emptying and stocking, at a house in Cheapside, opposite Wood-street , in my shop, which is in a house of Mr. Payne's; the tea came home that day about three or four o'clock in the afternoon; and they were employed in weighing it in bags of a quarter of a hundred each; about half past eight I desired them to be particularly careful, that nobody took any of the quarter of hundreds. I went out that evening about half past eight, this was on the Friday. When I came to town on the Saturday morning between eight and nine, I was informed there was a man in custody.

Prisoner's Councel. You do not live there? - Yes, I live there, I have the shop and the warehouse, that if I chuse to sleep there I can. Mr. Payne pays the taxes; and I rent a part of it for the accommodation of the shop, for myself and servants.

Mr. Payne is not at all connected with you in business? - Not at all.

Does Mr. Payne lay there at all himself? - Yes, I am accommodated with the whole house if I want it, I have a house in Bishopsgate-street; it was only taken on account of the extension of business.


I was coming along Cheapside, on Friday the 13th of April, about half past eight, or rather more, between that and nine, I stopped by chance to look in at Mr. Eagleton's window; and a man came to me with a bag across his shoulders, and said to me, that teas are much cheaper than they were, he was in the street, I did not take notice of him before; I looked at him very hard; and he said, do you think you should know us again? I looked round towards the door of the shop; and I saw the prisoner standing at the door; and a man a little further on with a knot across his shoulders, then I watched them; and I crossed the way, and went a little way further down towards Bow-church on the other side of the way, then I turned again, and came almost opposite the shop, when I got almost opposite the shop, I saw the prisoner coming out with a parcel of tea, he came to a man about three yards from the door, who had a knot, I suppose him to be the same man I saw before with the knot, he returned into the shop, and came out again with another parcel, when he was coming out, there was a man and a woman selling nuts and oranges, I spoke to the man and told him; by that time they were both turned down Pread street, and were gone, the man that was selling nuts blamed me for not speaking sooner; however, in two or three or four minutes they all three came again, the prisoner walked backwards and forwards several times, at last they all three came across the way, the prisoner I believe bought a half penny worth of nuts, the other bought an orange, the man I spoke to fixed himself up against one of the houses, then they all three went over directly; and they all walked backwards and forwards two or three times; and the prisoner went into the shop again, and brought out another bag, then the man that sold the nuts and me both took hold of him, a mob got round us, we never quitted him, we seized him while he had the bag in his hand, we brought him into the shop, the bag was put into the constable's hands, the bag that was delivered to the constable was the same I took from the prisoner.

- NORMAN sworn.

I am constable. I have had it in my possession ever since, it is the same bag.


I was sitting along with my wife at a stall opposite Mr. Eagleton's, and the witness came across the way, and told me; I saw the prisoner coming out of the shop door, with a bag, and I run across the way and laid hold of him by the collar, before he got to the corner of Bread-street.

Did you see him go out of the shop? - I did.


I am shopman to Mr. Eagleton, on the 13th of this month I was very busy tying up quarters of hundreds bags, I was informed a man had come in and taken one of the parcels, I instantly went out and found the prisoner in custody, he was brought into the shop with one of the bags, it was one of those that I tied up, there is my own mark on it, we mark every bag that we tie up with the quantity, this was tied up before it was taken.

Prisoner. There was no mark upon it but what was put on afterwards.

Prisoner's councel to Mr. Eagleton. Have you any partners in this business? - No.

Do you carry on this shop on your own account? - Yes.

Nobody is concerned at all with you in this shop? - No, I am the only person that have any thing to do with the profit and loss.

Has this dwelling house any communication with your warehouse? - Yes, they go through the shop, there is a side passage, only inside shutters makes the passage.

What is the tea worth? - Four pounds.

Court to Fullford. Is the prisoner an entire stranger to you? - Yes.

Not a person employed in the shop? - No.

GUILTY , Death .

He was humbly recommended to mercy by the Jury.

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-47
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

376. JAMES SMALL was indicted for stealing, on the 21st of March last, twenty-six pounds weight of brass, called cast-brass, value 26 s. the property of Peter Leatt .

There being no evidence, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-48
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

377. JAMES HANLEY was indicted for stealing, on the 4th day of March last, sixteen pounds weight of soap, value 7 s. the property of Samuel Stone , and Jonathan Punshon .

The prosecutor not being able to swear to the property, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-49

Related Material

378. JOHN HEARNON was indicted for stealing, on the 4th of April , one silk handkerchief, value 3 s. the property of John Lumley .

The prosecutor saw the prisoner pick his pocket on Fish-street Hill , and took him in three or four minutes; and saw him drop the handkerchief.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-50

Related Material

379. JANE MARRIOTT was indicted for stealing, on the 14th day of March last, one woman's black silk cloak, value 20 s. the property of Ebenezer Bourne .

The prisoner had lived servant with the prosecutor, and went away, taking the cloak with her, which was found upon her.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-51

Related Material

380. WILLIAM BAKER was indicted for stealing, on the 22d day of March last, one cloth great coat, value 5 s. the property of John Smith .

David Howell saw the prisoner come out of the prosecutor's house (the door being left open) with a great coat, which was deposed to by the prosecutor.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-52

Related Material

381. WILLIAM DUDNEY was indicted for stealing, on the 23d day of March last, three silver table-spoons, value 20 s. one glass pepper-box, with a silver top, value 7 s. and one silver salt-spoon, value 3 s. the property of John Pottinger .


I am servant to the prosecutor; on the 23d of March last I was in the parlour, and had rubbed the things mentioned in the indictment, which lay on a little sideboard; the street-door was open, and the prisoner came in softly, and took them; he did not see me; he put them in his pocket, and put a mug under his coat; I ran after him, and he turned round and hit me with the mug on the head, and again on the side; he ran away, and I lost him; he was taken the next morning; the things were never found; I am sure he is the person.


Confirmed the above.


I took the prisoner out of sixteen the next day, at the Marquis of Granby, in Chick-lane.

Prisoner. I am innocent.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-53

Related Material

382. JAMES STEWART was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Jane Combrune , widow , about the hour of one in the night, on the 15th of March last, and burglariously stealing therein one silver tea-spoon, value 1 s. two silver salt-spoons, value 3 s. three silver castor tops, value 3 s. the goods and chattels of her the said Jane, and one silver tea-spoon, value 1 s. the property of Mary Carpenter , spinster .

(The case opened by counsel.)


I am servant to Mrs. Combrune, who lives at Hackney ; her house joins to the Church-field, the garden gate opens into the field; on the 14th of March last I was the last person that went to bed; the house was quite secure, every part of it; every fastening was quite safe; the next morning the sash was open, and the lower part of the inside shutter was wrenched off; that was the back-parlour, adjoining to the garden; the garden gate was open; there were two locks to the parlour doors, and the box of these locks was wrenched off.

What property was taken? - Three teaspoons, two salt-spoons, and some castor tops.

Where were they the over night? - In the parlour.

What was in the parlour? - The two tea-spoons, and the castor tops; the two salt-spoons, and the other spoon, were in the kitchen; he lock of the garden gate was rather damaged; the window of the garden door was damaged.

Mr. Peatt, Prisoner's Counsel. How do you know you was the last person up? - Because I saw all the rest gone to bed.


On the 15th of March, about half past five, within a minute under or over, I set out to go to work at Dalston, from Mourning-lane, Hackney, about 100 yards from the watch-box, may be 200 yards from Church-field; when I came to the watchman I asked him what was the reason he was not off his duty, as it was past five? he said he had

orders to stay there till six; I fell into discourse with him, and five men came on; I said, these are the men; I went and leaned against a post; it was half past five; it was light enough to see to do any thing; light enough to discern any person's face, so as to know them again, having some suspicion that these were the men; the five men past me; they were coming from toward the place where the robbery was committed, from Mourning-lane; then we pursued them.

Did you know the prisoner? - I had no knowledge of any of the men but Wilson; I do not know this prisoner; we pursued them from Hackney to Kingsland, Newington Green, Cannonbury House, Islington, City Gardens, and into Goswel-street, and there we took Wilson in a public-house near that spot.

Mr. Peatt. You say they were coming from towards the house that was broke open? - Yes.

There were several roads; the road they came led to other places besides the house that was broke open? - Yes.

To many others? - Yes.


I am a watchman; I pursued the five men from Mourning lane; I have no knowledge of the prisoner.


I am headborough of Saint Luke's; this young man is one of the four that passed me in Brick-lane.

What four? - This young man and three more, between six and seven in the morning; I was in Brick-lane, just by Old-street, four men passed me; they were in a very desperate condition; they came from towards Islington; I looked at them very hard.

Court. That leads from many other places besides Islington? - I saw four men running and walking as fast as they could; I did not see any person pursuing them; I took them to be thief-takers, made me take more notice of them; there were Thompson, Wilson, and Collins, and the prisoner is the fourth; I am sure he was in company with Wilson and Thompson; I was not much further than I am from you; I am positive he was one; they were very dirty, and in a great muck of sweat; they struck into Goswell-street; I pursued them to where I heard the cry of stop thief; I pursued them as far as Charter-house Square; then Wilson and Thompson were stopped; when I came up, I took them into custody; I took them to the Cart and Horses; they swore they would not walk, but would have a coach; I said they should.

Mr. Peatt. They were walking very fast when you saw them first? - They were.

I suppose if they had not been coming from Islington, if they had walked as fast, they would have been in a sweat. - Certainly; I never saw Stewart before that moment.


I followed four of the five men from Hackney; I lost one of them in Mr. Scott's fields, in Hoxton; they came through Kingsland; I believe Washbrook, Frost, and Wilton were with me; I cannot speak to the prisoner; I saw much such a man as him come out of Mourning-lane.

Mr. Peatt. You have seen a great many men of the prisoner's size? - Yes.

Court to Washbrook. Which way did these men that you and the watchmen followed go? - They went to Kingsland, to Newington Green, to Canonbury House, to Islington, the City Gardens, and from there to Goswell-street.

Did you lose sight of them? - Yes, several times; I took Collins at last in a public-house; they tell me it was Goswell-street; we followed all five till we came to Kingsland, within one hundred yards of the town; there we got information of four; we lost one before we came to Kingsland.


I followed them from Hackney; I lost one in Mr. Scott's brick-field; we pursued

the other four into London; two of them were taken coming into Sutton-street; that was Wilson and Robinson; I do not know any one of them.


I am gardener to Mrs. Waller, and our garden comes into Colebrook Row, and I was standing at the garden gate, waiting for my mistress to let me in; it was about six, four men passed me; I looked at them, but said nothing to them; presently comes Frost, and he cried out stop thief; I asked him to go with me; he said, I have run till I can run no longer; so I followed them myself across the fields to the City Gardens; when I got to the City Gardens, they were at the bottom of the passage; then they came to the turnpike, and there I called out stop thief; I pursued them; I had them but very little time out of my sight all the time I was after them, I suppose about a minute and a half; I never lost sight of them from the bottom of Colebrook-row to the end of Brick-lane; one of the men took to Old-street; when they came to the end, I followed them; there were very few people in the street; when I came to the bottom I called out stop thief, and somebody else called stop thief as well as me; I ran up to the top of the lane, and lost sight of them about a minute; then somebody laid hold of Thompson; I stood by him while the man took a pistol out of his pocket, Wilson was stopped by somebody; he was delivered into my hands; I directly searched him, and took this wrench and an iron crow, and a center-bit out of his pocket; there were three men running together at the time, but the men went round the Charter house garden wall; I went up after Thompson; the prisoner was in another coat; when I pursued him he was lower than the rest.

Was he one of them? - I cannot positively swear to his side face; but he was lower than the rest, and in a different coloured coat.


I am a watch-case maker; I live in Cross-street, Sutton-street; on the fifteenth of March, about a quarter after six in the morning, I heard the cry of stop thief; I was just gone into my shop, which was in my garden, and two men run by, seemingly very much fatigued; one had on a light coloured great-coat, and the other a blue one; I was afraid to follow them; the first of the two men I saw put his hand into his side pocket, and twice or three times throw some things over the charter-house wall; I did not see what it was; I said on Friday, I rather thought it was something of plate.

Did you know who that man was? - It was not Wilson; I really believe it was the prisoner, but he had not on that coat, he had on a drab-coloured coat; I picked him out at Justice Blackborow's from a number, I suppose there were fifteen or sixteen; I said, if that was the man he had not on the same coat.

Mr. Peatt. You never saw the prisoner at the bar before? - Never, to my knowledge.

I suppose you know very well, that that man stands there for his life? - Yes; he was rather a short man.

There are many men of the same size. - I never saw him again till I saw him at the Justice's.

You say you was too far distant to see what was thrown over? - I mentioned to my patrol, and said I believed it to be plate; it was the glittering made me believe it was plate; I gave information at the time they were taken to my patrol; I told him to look into the Charter-house Garden; the things were found the next day in the Charter-house Garden; I saw the prisoner at Mr. Blackborow's, I went there to see whether it was him.

Who took you there to see him? - I had orders from that gentleman that stands there.

Who shewed the man to you? - The prisoner stood at what I suppose they call the bar; it struck me that I knew him; I hesitated in my mind.


I am a gardener belonging to the Charter-house; I found three castor-tops, and a pair of salt-spoons, and two tea-spoons, in the lower part of the garden, towards Saint John-street, near the back wall, near Wilderness-row.

Neave. That is within a yard or two where I saw the man throw over the things.


I am clerk to Mr. Blackborow; here are three tops of castors, two tea-spoons, and two salt-spoons, what I had from Weedon.

(Produced and deposed to.)


I have a drab coat here; I cannot say I found it in the room of the prisoner; I knew the prisoner lived there, by a private information; we apprehended him last Friday morning in bed, in Union-street; that was where the coat was found, on the same floor with the other; it is a common lodging-house, I believe; at the time we apprehended him, he asked who sent us to him; I told him that was a question I could not answer him; he said, it was my business to keep out of the way; I do not blame you for taking me.

Mr. Peatt. Then, if I understand you right, you had been at two places after this man at the bar? - Yes.

And you was told he lived there? - Yes.

And you found a drab-coloured coat in the next room to where he was? - Yes.

Neave. This is like the coat.

Mrs. MYERS sworn.

I live in Goswell-street; the prisoner and some other person took some apartments of me; nobody lived in my house at that time.

Did the prisoner live there? - They took some apartments; the prisoner and another person one Frost, and two women.

Who lived with them then? - Two ladies that used to lodge in my house; it was an empty house; I have several houses that I used to let out in apartments.

Who lodged in your house besides this man and Frost? - I never let any other apartments to any other men but them; the prisoner was never in my house afterwards; they left it some time in March, about the time; I do not know where they went to; I never was here before; the gentleman's name at the bar is Stewart; they were recommended to me as smuglers.

JOHN LUCY sworn.

I went with a direction from the magistrates to the house of Mrs. Combrune at Hackney, and I tried this iron crow to the places which had been wrenched; this was found on Wilson; every part of the door that had been forced, the large part of the crow fitted; I applied it to the part that had been forced of the window of the garden; I found that fitted likewise; in the parlour there was a brass lock, the box of which had been forced off, and left a large impression; the small end of this crow exactly fitted that; I apprehended the prisoner on Friday morning last, over the water; he said it was his business to get out of the way, and ours to take him; I was present at the Justice's, when Mr. Neave picked him out from all the rest.

Was there any thing that could distinguish him from all the rest? - Nothing at all.

Mr. Peatt. What are you, Sir? - I am a constable of Clerkenwell.

He had nothing on to distinguish him from other persons? - No, he was set at the bar.

(The things produced and deposed to.)

Prosecutrix. I know the spoons; one of them is marked.

Mr. Peatt. Do you know the spoons otherwise than by the letter upon them? - One has no letter.

Do you know them by any thing but by their general appearance? - I think they are mine.


That gentleman swore that he picked me out from every body else; I was standing by myself.

GUILTY , Death .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-54
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

383. JOHN PHILLIPS was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of the Reverend John Douglas , D. D. about the hour of one in the night, on the 5th of March last, and burglariously stealing therein one fish-skin et wee case, value 3 s. one knife, with a silver handle, value 12 d. a pair of scissars, value 6 d. one instrument, value 3 s. one silver milk-pot, value 5 s. one tooth pick case, value 4 s. one egg trinket, set in metal, value 5 s. three gold mourning rings, value 20 s. three shirts, value 24 s. one great coat, value 20 s. one silk sash, value 5 s. one silk scarf, value 15 s. one gold ring, value 6 l. one gold ring, with a stone set therein, value 3 l. one snuff-box, with a picture set in the lid, value 8 l. one varnish snuff-box, value 5 s. one other box, value 5 s. one iron key, value 1 d. and two pounds eight shillings and sixpence in monies numbered , his property.

(The case opened by Mr. Garrow.)

The Rev. JOHN DOUGLAS , Doctor of Divinity , sworn.

I live in Amen Corner ; I returned home on the Monday evening, on the 5th of March last, about eight o'clock; we had dined the day we had installed our dean, and after throwing off my clergyman's dress, and writing some letters; and one circumstance is necessary to mention, about nine o'clock I went into the water-closet, and I observed the window was shut; I went to the arch-deacon of Buckingham's house, and staid with him till twenty minutes after eleven, and supped with him; we have three residentiary houses, which are enclosed by a great gate; the house that I live in is the first; I returned home about half past eleven, and Mrs. Cowper, the servant that belongs to the three residentaries, (as my family were at Windsor) was ready to let me into my house; I desired her to go up stairs, and warm my bed; I undressed myself, and put my wig on the table in the inner room; I observed she locked the house door; she sleeps in the porter's lodge; she was to come again in the morning early, to open the house, and light the fire; this lodge is distinct from my house; I always shut the library door, which is the room I generally fit in; I shut another room door, that leads down to the kitchen, the back stairs, and the door that leads into the hall; there are two halls; all these doors I shut before I went to my bed-chamber; in the morning, I think Saint Paul's bell was tolling, that was a quarter before seven, Mrs. Cowper called out that the house was robbed; I got up instantly, and went into the library; it was then not quite seven; the moment that I came into my library, Mrs. Cowper had opened some of the windows; there are three windows in the library; they were all shut, and well secured on the over night with inside shutters; by the partial light that was let in by some of the windows being open, I saw the writing-desk broke open; there I kept my most valuable things I had in the house; that was locked the preceding night; the key was in my pocket in my bed-chamber; I found the upper lock forced open; there was another that drew out; that lock had been picked; the others were forced open; in the inside of the upper drawer lay all these four keys that are here; on the right-hand, one of these four keys was in the single press, of six presses under my book-case, where I kept any thing of consequence, which was the only one that contained any thing but books; none of the other presses were locked; every thing was thrown in the utmost confusion; there was a great many manuscript sermons; they were thrown

about, most of them on the floor; this red leather trunk was found quite empty; it contained an egg trinket, which is the only article we can produce in court.

How lately before this robbery had you seen this trinket? - Not perhaps since February; I believe in the course of that month I think I must have seen it, for I had a mourning-ring there, that I would have wished to have tried on my finger, and it would not enter at all, having had the gout fixed on the joint of it; I can charge my memory with having seen it in February; there were three mourning-rings, and some other articles that have not been traced; I immediately missed three snuff-boxes, one of them a very remarkable fine tortoise-shell, very large, with a picture; I suppose it cost more than ten guineas, a great many years ago; it might not be worth ten shillings now; there was a varnished snuff-box, which I had bought when I was at Spa; I had hardly used it; it was in this leather case, in one of the pidgeon-holes; the case was left empty; I lost a fish-skin case of instruments, that was lying in my ink-standdish, that was on the library table; a silver small pair of scissars, a knife, and other instruments were in that case; in the upper part of that writing-desk there was usually two keys of padlocks; they used to lay in a bit of paper together; one of them I found in the morning, the other was taken away; on the inside of the writing-desk there was a green varnish tooth pick case, with flowers of different colours, but the ground was green, and the pipe was what they call tortoise-shell, that was gone; I lost three shirts; going into my dressing-room, which is within my library, the window was close barred; I opened that window, and found the lower part of an India cabinet was broke open; in the upper part of that cabinet I kept papers; there might be a surplice, I believe; there was a glass door; nothing appeared but papers; I always kept all my linen in that lower part, and any body that lived in my house might know it; the upper part of the cabinet, that contained papers, was locked; I found these three keys laying on the carpet, immediately before that lock; they had been taken out of the desk; there were taken from that three shirts; there were no more there.

Do you know the prisoner? - Yes, to be sure; he lived with me six months; he entered into my service, by an almanack which I have here, on the 4th of April, 1786, and was discharged the 30th of September, as appears by my memorandum-book; I saw him once since, when he came and begged hard I would give him a character; I think that was the only time I saw him; I went into the water-closet between seven and eight in the morning; it was locked; there were three or four keys to it; the key that lay in the standish had certainly been made use of, and that part of the house had been entered in the night-time, because in the morning, between seven and eight, I found that sash open; there was no shutter or bar, or any thing; I found the floor of the water-closet all wet, and the cistern that conveyed the water into the bason was emptied; on pulling the string, there was no water came; I was satisfied it had been emptied in the night-time, and they let all the water run in till the bason overflowed.

Where did you find the key of that closet? - I found it laying in the ink-standish, and the door fastened; I found on one side some sheet lead (that was laid across the cistern, and some wire, to protect it from rusting) was all turned up, somebody's hand or foot must have pressed improperly against that lead, and shoved that lead out of its place; there must have been considerable force to change the form of it.

Mr. Knowlys. I think it was a little before seven that you was called up? - Yes.

At that time it was perfectly light, and had been so for some time? - Certainly.

Mr. Garrow. Did you observe any thing remarkable on any of your tables? - The corner of the library table, which has a deal drawer, I did observe a greasy round circular mark, and it struck me that it had

been occasioned by the standing of a dark lanthorn; I had no candlestick in my house that could make so small a mark; the candlestick I used has a large square bottom, that was plated; the buckles I had in my shoes were plated; they were not taken; the most valuable things were taken, and those of little value left; I had written two penny-post letters, and laid two-pence upon them; the pence were taken, and the letters left.

Mr. Knowlys. Nothing particular had happened to lead your attention to that table the night before? - No; on that table I left my buckles and candlestick, when I went to bed; there was a greasy mark; I had not observed such a mark before.


I attend at the porter's lodge, the canons' residentiary of St. Paul's; I remember attending Doctor Douglas, on the 5th; I warmed his bed, a little after eleven, then I went to bed, and double locked the street-door, as I always did, and took the key with me; I found the door double locked in the morning; I went to the Doctor's house at half after six.

Did you go into any other part of the house beside the Doctor's bed-room that night? - No, Sir, only into the kitchen; I did not go into the water-closet.

In what condition did you leave the kitchen, as to these fastenings, when you went away? - The kitchen door latched, and the door bolted on the inside, in the passage, and the other door locked; I double locked the street door and the outer door; when I came the next morning, I found the door double locked, and the door next to it shut, as I had left them; when I had opened the passage door, I saw the library door open; I shut the parlour door over night; that I found open; the stair-case door, leading to the kitchen, and the back stairs, that I found open; I went into the kitchen first; I found that door wide open; I am sure I left the kitchen door bolted the night before; then I came up into the library, and I saw the door of the press under the book-case, where the Doctor puts his sugar and tea, with the key in it, and the door open; that I was surprised at; at a distance I saw something white, which I took for a shirt, but it was a parcel of papers; I saw the lid of the writing-desk open four or five inches, and the contents all up in heaps; I came to the fire side, and turned round to look at the library, and a drawer of a card-table was taken out; I believe there was no lock to it; the papers were some thrown out on the table, and some in; then I went and called my maid to light the kitchen fire, and called the Doctor, and went into the water-closet; the Doctor called me, and the window was up, and the floor all wet.

Did you observe any thing particular on the library table? - I did not.

Any mark of any sort? - No, nobody pointed it out to to me.

Mr. Knowlys. When you came to the house it was perfectly light, I take it? - Yes, it had been light some time.


I am an officer in Bow-street; I apprehended the prisoner on the 7th of March; I think it was on a Wednesday, much about three in the afternoon; I found him at the Horse-shoe public-house, in Fleet-street, up a court, kept by Mr. Barker, a very good sort of a man; I searched him, and found a pocket-book, with twelve duplicates; and I found a key of a padlock upon him, and nothing else of consequence; I went to a place where these things were, in Plumb-tree Court, next door to the Vine Tavern, at one Mr. Griffiths's; he would not say whether it was or was not his lodgings; the things that were found at that place he acknowledged to be his; there was nothing relating to these; he was asked how he came by the key of the padlock; he said he found it; I tried this key to the padlock, in Doctor Douglas's Cellar, in the presence of Mrs. Cowper, and it opens it; he said, at the time, that the pocket-book and the

duplicates did not belong to him; in consequence of these duplicates I went to Mr. Dobres, a pawnbroker, in Holborn, where I found a shirt; at Mr. Lane's I found a pencil case, pawned for 2 s. I did not see it.


I am apprentice to Mr. Dobres, pawnbroker, in Holborn; I produce a shirt, it was taken in of the prisoner; I saw it taken on Tuesday the 6th of March; about eleven or twelve.

In what name? - In the name of Smith; the prisoner had been a customer before, so we asked him no questions; this is the duplicate; six shillings was lent upon it; he has been a customer at our shop about two months; I am sure he was the person; I know him perfectly well; this is the shirt that he pledged.


I am shopman to Mr. Lane, pawnbroker, in Drury-lane; the prisoner has not been at the shop before that I remember; on the 6th of March, I took from him an etwee case, and a tooth-pick case, in the name of Smith, about four in the afternoon; I lent him two shillings upon them; this is the duplicate; I am sure of the prisoner; here is a knife in the fish-skin case, with a silver handle; and a pair of little scissars, and a steel instrument for cleaning teeth; there was nothing in the tooth-pick case.

Mr. Knowlys. Mr. Lane's is a shop of a good deal of practice? - Yes.

An established shop, and a good many customers in the course of a day? - Yes, we have.

This person had not been a customer before? - Not that I remember.

Dr. LUKE HESLOP sworn.

By whom was this egg delivered? - By Mr. Humphries.

You have had it in possession ever since? - Yes.

Mrs. HUMPHRIES sworn.

I have been acquainted with the prisoner several months; I saw him give this egg to my child on the Tuesday morning.

Mr. Knowlys. Do you take this to be a common kind of trinket? - Yes, I did not think it of any value.

Did you ever see such a one before? - Yes, I have.

(The things deposed to by Dr. Douglas.)

I have no doubt of them; this is the fish-skin case; I am certain of them by twenty marks; this trinket I have had in my possession, thirty-five years next December; I have had frequent occasions of looking into the little box where it was; it belonged to a lady that died many years ago; I am thoroughly sure, if it is a thing that is capable of being ascertained; mine was cracked exactly in the same manner; and that bit of wire by which it is suspended, is remarkably slight; I lost such a padlock key as this, that night; I have not seen it tried by the padlock in the cellar, but I had two padlock keys, one was left and the other was lost; I lost such a key as that; I cannot swear to it; the keys do not exactly agree; I suppose both the keys open the same padlock; there was a shirt produced to me at Bow-street; it was compared by other people; I wish to say nothing about the shirt, it will be proved.

Mr. Knowlys. You say you have no doubt about this etwee case, Sir? - No, Sir.

It is very old, and very much out of repair, and I suppose will sell for very little indeed? - I am very unequal to say what it is worth; it cost about 25 s. at first, it is very old and out of order.

This trinket, you can hardly set any value upon it; is this your house? - As residentiary of Saint Paul's, it is my freehold; I occupy it, and that is enough; I lost things to the value of fifty pounds, and the person who took these took a great many more.

As to this key it is a very common kind of key? - You are as good a judge as I am, there is no doubt of it.


I am servant to Doctor Douglas; this shirt is his; he had but a very small quantity of linen in town; at this time the mark is picked out; there is an I left.

Can you trace what the other mark had been? - The round mark of the blue appears to be the shape of a D.

Is there any number there? - Here is, but it is picked so, it is not perfect; I cannot positively trace it out.

In what colour had it been originally marked? - With blue Coventry thread; that was the manner in which the Doctor's linen was marked in progressive numbers; the number 5 was lost that night, and I believe the others were old shirts; I cannot be positive whether this is a 5 or not; this shirt is a plain shirt, very much like the Doctor's shirts in the collar, the wristbands, and the make of the shirts wholly; it is not my own making; I really think it is one of his shirts; the I is marked with blue Coventry thread, and the mark that remains is the mark of blue.

(The shirt handed to the Jury.)

Jury. We can see No. 5; it is very plain; I. D. No. 5.

Mr. Garrow to Mrs. Hatch. Have you any doubt but that is one of the Doctor's shirts? - Not the least; I have seen the other articles many times in the Doctor's places; I know he had such things; the Doctor kept his tea and sugar in a press, at the bottom of the book case; I know the prisoner lived in the Doctor's service some months in that house.

Court to Mrs. Cooper. Was you present when Mr. Jealous tried the key of the padlock to the cellar door? - Yes, I saw him try it twice.

Did the key open the padlock? - It did, as if it had been bought for it.

Have you occasionally had the Doctor's linen pass through your hands? - Yes, when the servants are out of town, I have washed the shirts.

Look at that shirt; do you believe from the appearance of that shirt that it is one of Doctor Douglas's? - I have no doubt of it.

Doctor Heslop . I am Arch-deacon of Bucks; I live the next door but one to Doctor Douglas, in the Bishop of London's residentiary-house; I visit him frequently; he went from my house that night; he pulled out his watch and said, it was twenty-three minutes past eleven; this egg I took from Mrs. Humphries, about nine or ten at night; as soon as I took it from my pocket, the doctor was sitting at some distance; it was candle light; says he, that is mine, it belonged to my first wife; he said it was cracked, and the thinness of the wire; before it was put into his hands, he was at a greater distance from me than I am from you; calling at the pawnbrokers, he said, he believed he had this and the toothpick case; I desired him to bring it to my house; he did, upon producing it, the Doctor said, that is mine, for on taking hold of it at top you take off all at once; and there was a little bit of ivory lost, and that there was a silver top, but the pencil had been lost for some time; about nine in the morning after the robbery, the Doctor pointed out to me the grease on the table; I went and examined it, and in my judgement, it had entirely the appearance of a dark lanthorn set down there; that was my conclusion.

Court. You do not mean that there was any real grease upon it? - It was not grease that you might have taken up with your finger, but there was so much that you might have scratched it up with your nail; the Doctor first pointed out the water-closet to me; there is a cistern on the outside; it supplies two water closets; there are two closets; the one draws up and the other slides half-way back; there appeared no view of any person entering forcibly; but the only place I could discover after examination, that must have been the place of entering as it suggested itself; just beyond the edge of

the cistern, seemed either two hands or two feet marks, such as your foot or hand would make an impression when there had been a little rain; they were recent marks so evident, that I went into Doctor Jeffery 's house, and pointed it out to him that there were two marks; the only appearance.


I keep the Boar's-head in Fleet-street; I know the prisoner; I remember seeing him at my house, on Monday the 5th of March; I think it was.

What time did he come to your house? - I really cannot tell.

What time did he go away? - A few minutes past eleven.

How long had he been at your house? - I really cannot say, he might have been there an hour or two; I am sure to his person.


I leave it to my Councel.

(Witnesses called, but none answered.)

GUILTY, 39 s.

But not of the burglary.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-55
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

384. WILLIAM JACKSON was indicted for stealing, on the 27th of February last, one wainscot claw table, value 3 s. the property of Catherine Whitrow , widow , and Charles Whitrow .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-56
SentenceCorporal > whipping

Related Material

385. JOHN YOUNG was indicted for stealing, on the 21st day of March last, one large copper pot, value 10 s. the property of Edward Higgs .

The prosecutor saw the prisoner take the copper pot from the door.


Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-57

Related Material

386. ADAM BELL was indicted for stealing, on the 20th day of April , one linen and cotton handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of James Kershaw .

The prosecutor took the prisoner in the act of picking his pocket, and saw him drop his handkerchief.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-58
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

387. JOSEPH MANNING was indicted for stealing, on the 19th day of March , 50 yards of linen cloth, value 50 s. the property of Joseph Capps .

The witnesses called and not appearing the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-59
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

388. HENRY MURRAY was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Hull , about the hour of seven in the night, on the 30th of March , and burglariously stealing therein, one pair of leather shoes, value 4 s. 6 d. his property .

JOHN HULL sworn.

I am a shoe maker , No. 59, Old Gravel-lane, Saint George's ; on the 30th of

March, I was at work in my shop by candle-light, and all of a sudden a man broke in my window; I thought it had been an accident; in about half a minute, I saw a hand come into the window and take out a pair of shoes; I was at work with my face to the window; there was no shutters; I was about a yard from the glass; I immediately went to the door, and called stop thief; when I had got to the door, I saw a person running about twenty, thirty, or forty yards from the door; I saw nobody else in the street at the time, but I saw a person who caught him in about five minutes after; when he was taken, he said, he was in liquor and fell against the glass and broke it and run away, because he had no money to pay for it; he was sober enough in a quarter of an hour after he was taken; I lost fight of him when he was taken.


I was going down Gravel-lane, between seven and eight in the evening; I heard some glass fly; it made a great noise indeed; I immediately looked about me; it was about twenty or thirty yards before me; I immediately heard a man cry out stop thief, a man came running and crossed the way; I met him to stop him; he gave me the double, I struck him with this cane, which had a head then, and it flew off; he dropped the shoes; a man met him and knocked him down; he lay as if drunk; then I gave him a tap, and he was sulky, and I pulled him up; two other men came up and assisted to take him; he said he was drunk in coming past, and he shoved his elbow through the window, and he run away because he had no money to pay for the glass; I heard the shoes drop; I will not pretend to say I saw them drop; I picked them up immediately.

How far from him was you? - I was going to lay hold of him, and he gave me a turn, and it was at that time he dropped the shoes; there was not a person on that side of the way; as soon as he got past me, two men attempted to stop me.

(The shoes deposed to.)

They have my stamp at the bottom.


I know nothing of the shoes.

GUILTY Of stealing, but not of the burglary .

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

[Transportation. See summary.]

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-60

Related Material

389. THOMAS FAIRBANK was indicted for stealing, on the 12th of March last, one muslin cap, value 14 s. a muslin handkerchief, value 3 s. four pair of robins, value 3 s. four linen shifts, value 12 s. one white bed-gown, value 2 s. a black crape gown, value 2 s. a black petticoat, value 3 s. fourteen linen napkins, value 10 s. 6 d. two aprons, value 2 s. one fan, value 6 d. a copper pot lid, value 1 s. and one iron bed winch, value 6 d. the property of Elizabeth Wilson , widow .


I go out a nursing ; on the 12th of March last, I had been confined to my room; I went to the hospital; the prisoner lodged at my apartments; and he was very inquisitive to know when I should come home; I came home on the 7th of March; on the Monday following, which was the 12th, I went to my trunk to get some clean linen, and I had nothing there only one hat and a pair of sheets; on the Thursday this man left my lodgings; I saw my things when I went into the hospital; I was there eleven weeks, but there is some of the property I found; I left them in a large hair trunk, locked up in my own apartment.

Can you mention what you left in your trunk when you went to the hospital? - Yes, the things mentioned in the indictment; on the 13th of March I saw a pair of double robins at one Mr. Legatr's

shop, in Fleet-lane; I claimed them there, I found a cap, and I found out enough to apprehend the prisoner, and he was taken the 17th, which was the Saturday following.


The prisoner came to me and took part of a bed with another man; it was the apartment of the prosecutrix; he lodged there about eight weeks; he came there in her absence; she came back the 7th of March, and he quitted his lodgings the 8th, which was the Thursday; I saw this trunk in her room; I never saw what was in it.


I know the prisoner; one day he came into my shop, and asked me if I would come into the shop; I keep an open shop in Fleet-lane, and deal in shoes and stockings, and other things; it was about three months ago that he came; I was at the door dealing with a man for a pair of stockings; the girl called me; when I came in, he opened a handkerchief, and shewed me the things; I bid him money; he would not take it; he shook his head, and appeared very much affected, and said his wife was dead, and had left these things; then he went away, and came again, and said he could get no more, and I was a fair dealing woman; I gave him thirteen shillings or fourteen shillings for the whole.


I was sent for to take charge of the prisoner; the property was delivered to my care by the owner.

Mrs. Wilson. I delivered them to the constable; I can swear to them all.

Mrs. Stewart. I may have had them three months.


I was in the shop when the prisoner came in to sell the things; he said, his wife was dead and he was getting the things out of pawn.


It was a common lodging house; another man slept with me; I sold some things of my wife's; I know nothing of these things.


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-61
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

390. MARGARET DARNELL was indicted for stealing, on the 30th day of March last, one dozen of desert knives and forks, value 6 s. the property of James White , privily in his shop .


I am an ironmonger and cutler in Holborn, near Chancery-lane ; on the 30th of March in the evening, about nine, the prisoner came into my shop under a pretence of buying some knives; I was writing behind my counter; my man shewed her several sorts; they did not suit her; at last she wanted some tacks, and asked the price of them, he told her three half-pence a hundred; she said, that was too much; I said to the man, she does not want any thing; she turned round to go out, and my man missed the parcel of knives; they were done up to go away; he immediately seized her by the cloak and pulled her cloak off; she left that behind her; she almost knocked the man down; my man has the property.


I saw the prisoner come into the shop; I have no doubt but it is the same woman; she asked for some small knives; I shewed her the sort; she said, she thought they were too dear; I looked on the counter where the knives and forks stood; I saw them just before I reached out the drawer; when I looked the second time, I saw but one parcel; I caught hold of her, and asked her what she had under her cloak; she made no answer, but went towards the door; her

cloak came off in my hand; I pursued and took her just on the outside of the door; just as I took hold of her, the things were thrown down; I picked them up and carried them into the shop, and found they were one of the two parcels that lay in the shop; she leaned exactly on that part of the counter; the cloak spread over the knives that I could not see her take them.

- PATRICK sworn.

I was going to the prosecutor's house with a pint of beer; I guarded her from dinging it out of my hand; I saw her throw something down; it was taken up immediately; that was the parcel.

(Deposed to by the prosecutor having his shop mark on it.)

Thomas. They were looked out that evening; one parcel were table knives, the other desert knives; she only took the deserts.

What is the value of these? - Six shillings.


I was sent for a penny-worth of nails; I went to this shop, and they charged me three half-pence; there were two women in the shop when I went in; they went out while I was there; as I was going out I saw the parcel lay; I never touched it.

Prosecutor. There was no other person in the shop.

Thomas. There was nobody.

GUILTY Of stealing, but not privily .

Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-62

Related Material

391. JOHN CROAKER was indicted for stealing, on the 28th day of February last, a silk handkerchief, value 3 s. the property of Samuel Hinton , privily from his person .


On the 28th of February, or the 1st of March, I will not be positive which, I was in Long-acre, on the left hand side, beyond James-street ; and I heard a voice behind me say, your pocket is picked; the prisoner at the bar immediately passed me and run; he had time to secret the handkerchief; it was the fellow of this; it was in his right hand; I pursued him myself and called out stop thief the length of the street; I lost him for a minute; he was stopped in Rose-lane; I came up to him and collared him, and a posse of people surrounded us; I found he had delivered the handkerchief; they wanted to duck him; I took him to the Public-office; the handkerchief, I suppose, he had quitted the moment he turned into Rose-street; I did not see what became of it; I never got it afterwards; the person who told me I had my pocket picked was bound over to prosecute, by Sir Robert Taylor ; I did not trouble him to go before the Grand Jury; all this passed in a very few moments; Sir Robert committed him to Newgate.

Was it a new handkerchief or an old one? - It has been washed; I valued it at three shillings.


I was coming up Long-acre; opposite to that gentleman; as I was passing him I saw the prisoner put his hand in his pocket and take the handkerchief out; and I said, young man, is that the way you are going on; I told the prosecutor his pocket was picked.

Did you see him take a handkerchief? - Yes, I pursued him and took him.

Did you see him part with the handkerchief? - I cannot say whether I did or no; I will not say that I did.


I had been of an errand for my father, into great Wild-street; coming back down

Long-acre, I heard the alarm of stop thief; I run with the rest, and they laid hold of me; I have several friends at the door.

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


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-63
SentenceCorporal > whipping

Related Material

392. THOMAS GODFREY was indicted for stealing, on the 16th day of April , 13 lb. weight of bacon, value 5 s. the property of John Smith .

The prosecutor saw the prisoner take the bacon off a hook in the shop; he called out, and the prisoner threw back the bacon and ran; the prosecutor pursued and took him.

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


Whipped .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-64
SentenceCorporal > whipping; Imprisonment

Related Material

393. THOMAS NORTHOVER was indicted for stealing, on the 2d day of April , one carcase of a sheep, containing 64 lb. weight of mutton, value 24 s. the property of William Grover .


I am a butcher in Neport-market ; I was down in my cellar, killing; and a person came by in the dusk of the evening, and bawls out, does any body belong to the sheep? here is a sheep laying at a distance, and here is a hook missing! I came up immediately and missed a sheep; I pursued after it, and overtook the prisoner with the sheep, and he chucked the sheep off his shoulder; I called him by his name; I knew him; he lived within a door of me, for a quarter of a year; I took him to the office; he said another man took it off the hook, and gave him to carry.

Prisoner. I never said so, I deny having the sheep.


To be whipped and imprisoned six months .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-65

Related Material

394. JAMES WHITE was indicted for stealing, on the 5th of April , two shirts, value 36 s. the property of Henry Read .

The prisoner was seen getting out of a garden, where linen was hanging to dry; and being pursued he dropt the property.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-66

Related Material

395. JANE DUNDAS was indicted for stealing, on the 26th day of February last, one linen tablecloth, value 4 s. two napkins, value 2 s. one towel, value 4 d. the property of the Right Honorable John Skinner , Knight .

- DOWSON sworn.

I am butler to Sir John Skynner ; the prisoner was laundry maid about a year and a half; the pawnbroker informed us before we missed the linen; the prisoner did not deny it.

(Mr. Burkitt, the pawn-broker, produced the things, which were deposed to.)

She said she lived with Judge Heath; I sent there and they knew nothing of her; then I was a going to send for a constable, and she fell a crying, and said she lived at Baron Skinner 's, and they were his property.

Prisoner. I beg for mercy; I have nobody to my character; I leave myself entirely to Sir John's mercy and the gentlemen of the Jury.

Dowson. She behaved vastly well always; bore a very good character for years before, a quiet sober girl.

Prisoner. I intended to redeem them again.

Court. You could not be distressed for money in that service I am sure.

Prisoner. It was for the lottery.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-67
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

396. SUSANNAH ALLEN was indicted for stealing, on the 4th day of March last, one dimity gown, value 15 s. a cotton petticoat, value 6 s. a silk cloak, value 5 s. a muslin apron, value 7 s. a pair of linen pockets, value 12 s. a silk handkerchief, value 3 s. a pair of base metal shoe-buckles, value 2 s. a muslin handkerchief, value 2 s. and a pair of thread stockings, value 6 d. the property of Mary Ann Bailey , in the dwelling-house of George Robinson .


I go out to work; I live at No. 7, Crown-street, Hog-lane.

Who do you live with? - Mr. Burgess, a saddle-tree maker.

Do you know any thing of Mr. Robinson? - No, I never was there but once in my life; I lost several things last month in Parker's-lane , in Mr. Robinson's house; I lost my way, and I asked the watchman, and the prisoner at the bar took me in; it was the 4th of March, about half after eleven at night.

Where had you been? - In Queen-street, Lincoln's Inn-Fields; I was going home.

How came you to lose your way? - Because I am not used to be out at night; I was going home; nobody was with me.

Had you a bundle of things with you? - No, they were the clothes I had on.

What did you do upon losing your way? - I was coming down Long Acre, and I lost my way into Crown-street, Hog-lane; I asked the prisoner at the bar; I never saw her before; she told me, if I would go along with her she would shew me; but instead of shewing me the way home, she took me into Parker's-lane, to Mr. Robinson's, an ironmonger's shop; when I got to the door, she asked me to go up stairs, which I refused several times; she asked me to drink with her; I had no objection; with much persuasion I did go up stairs.

How did she persuade you? - She said, if I would go up stairs with her while she poked down her fire, she would see me home; when she got up stairs, she asked me to treat her; I put my hand in my pocket, and gave her a shilling to get some beer; she was gone about an hour, and returned again, and said it was too late, and she could not get any beer; there was another girl with her at the same time, that

kept me in talk, and staid with me; she asked me if I would have any gin to drink; I told her I was not fond of spirits, and she went and got some raspberry, and they made me drink a tea-cup full; the prisoner came in again, and took a bottle, and was gone three quarters of an hour, and made me drink a tea-cup full, or else they would throw it over me; I drank it; I was afraid of having my white gown stained; they made as if it was red port, so I drank it up; then they made me go to bed; one of them undressed me, while the o the put her back against the door, and said I should not go out.

How long was it after you drank the teacup full? - About half an hour; it was getting very late.

Did this raspberry affect you? - Yes, I suppose it did, or I should not have done such a thing; it was about half an hour after two; I was not so bad but I had my understanding about me; I laid there about ten minutes; I dropt asleep, and I was awaked by the prisoner moving my head, and taking my pockets from under my head; the prisoner and the girl made a sham to undress themselves, when they undressed me; I suppose I fell asleep directly upon getting into bed; it could not be above ten minutes before I was waked; I folded up my gown in my handkerchief, and pinned it in another, on a chair at the bed-side; my petticoats were loose, my pockets were under my head; then I was awaked by their taking my pockets; I looked round, though I pretended to be asleep, and I saw the prisoner and the other woman, with my pockets and the other things; the prisoner had my gown and apron, the other took the other things, and blew out the candle, and poked out the fire; I did not speak to them while they continued in the room, I was afraid, as it was a strange place; as soon as they were gone, I got up to look for my pockets; I found nothing but my hat and shoes, and shift that I had on; I went down in my shift, and a man came up; I called Mr. Robinson.

Had you seen him before? - No, Sir, I did not know his name then; I went down stairs, and knocked at the door; he came up, and desired me to make myself contented, he should find the person out; on Monday night Mr. Freeman took her; I stopped till about half after six in the morning; Mr. Robinson went and got me some things, and Mr. Freeman went to a relation's of mine, and got me some clothes.

What day of the week was this? - It was on Sunday night, the 4th of March.

When did you see the prisoner again? - Not till Tuesday morning, before Justice Walker.

Now, my girl, be positively sure the prisoner is the person. - I am sure of it; I never saw her before; there was a candle in the room till I went to bed; I am positive to the woman; as soon as I saw her, I knew her.

Have you got the things here? - The pawn-broker has got them.

Who do you live with? - I live by myself.

Who do you lodge with? - Mr. Burgess.

How do you get your livelihood? - I work, and earn nine shillings a week, making ladies hoops and hips.

Who had you been with that night? - With a young woman that was going down to Bath.

Had you been drinking any thing before? - Nothing but some beer to my supper.


On Monday morning, the 5th of March, about six, I was called up by Robinson, the landlord of this house; I went up two pair of stairs, in a back room, and I found the prosecutrix in bed, and her clothes all gone, excepting her hat and shoes; I asked her who she was, she was in such a flood of tears, it was a long while before she could tell me; at last she did, and began to describe the prisoner.

Did the prosecutrix describe her to you? - Yes, she said she should know her from

a hundred, she was so particularly marked in the face, and I knew the prisoner living in that house, I went to the prosecutrix's friends, where she directed me, and fetched her sister to her, to bring her some clothes, and take her away; after that, I took a description of the clothes she had lost; as soon as the pawn-brokers opened, I went round, and searched many of them; at one pawn-broker's I found a gown and cloak, and an apron; some of the things are not found yet.


I went into a neighbour's house, with a cap and a pair of stockings to the woman, and the prisoner was sitting there; I happened to go in two or three times that evening; about five the prisoner asked me to pawn a gown and coat; this was on Monday evening; she said nothing, but that she would pay me for my trouble; I went to this pawnbroker; she desired me to ask twelve shillings for them; I said they were not worth half the money, but I asked half a guinea of this gentleman, and he gave me nine shillings and sixpence; I immediately got a ticket in her name, which she gave me as Sarah Smith ; I never saw her before, to my knowledge; I came back, and gave her the nine shillings and five-pence halfpenny, and the ticket, which cost a halfpenny; she gave me three-pence for my trouble, and in five minutes after, another penny.


I am a pawn-broker; I took in these things of a Dorothy Howell , on Monday, the 5th of March; I gave her nine shillings and six-pence for the gown and petticoat; she said they belonged to Sarah Smith ; in a short time after, she brought me a black silk cloak, which she said belonged to some girl; she had fifteen pence on that; Howell said that was from another girl.

(The things deposed to by the Prosecutrix.)

Prosecutrix. The gown is joined at the top of the hips; the petticoat is the same as the gown; I had a black silk cloak on that night.

What were the other things you had on? - A white under petticoat, a pair of stockings, a silk handkerchief, and some things I had in my pocket of no great value, a pen-knife, and an etwee-case; these things are not found.

(The things deposed to by Howell.)

Howell. I examined the gown before I went out with it, and saw this piece across the hips, which made me say I should not get so much for it; I know them to be the same.

Is Mr. Robinson here? - No.

Court to Freeman. When did you take up this prisoner? - On Monday night.

Do you happen to know when she left her lodgings? - Yes, she absconded, for I went three or four times on that day to see whether she was at home or not; I took her on Monday night, in Robinson's parlour; he detained her till I came; Beamish was present at the apprehending her.


I am innocent of the affair; after I had fetched some raspberry and gin, she gave me six-pence for a pot of half and half; when I returned, she was crying upon the stairs, and said she was robbed; I went and looked after the young woman till Monday night; when I returned, they stopped me.

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 10 s.

Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-68

Related Material

397. THOMAS RICKARBY was indicted for stealing, on the 28th day of February last, three trusses of hay, value 5 s. the property of the Right Honorable James, Earl of Lonsdale .

(The case opened by the counsel for the prosecution.)


I am watchman, stationed at Hill-street, Berkley-square, in Haye's Mews; on the 28th of February, as I was crying the hour of six, I saw Richard Burchell putting some loose rubbish of hay on the top of his cart, which stood at Lord Lonsdale's stable-door; the hay came from the hay-loft; I saw it come out of the hay-loft; it was but just done loading; I did not see any body besides Richard Burchell ; after I had gone my round, I came back, and the cart was just driving away from my Lord's stable door; I followed it till I came into John-street; I stopped the cart, and asked Burchell what he had in the cart; he told me some rubbishing hay; I examined the cart, and I found three trusses, besides a quantity of loose hay; I took him to the watch house, and kept him there till he went before the magistrate; it was the same day; I went about eleven to fetch the prisoner; he was my Lord's coachman; when they came before the magistrate, they asked Richard Burchell -

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Counsel. Was the examination before the Justice taken down in writing? - I did not observe.

Counsel for the prosecution. What passed? - He asked Richard Burchell where he had the hay from; the prisoner was present; Burchell said he bought it of the prisoner at the bar, and the prisoner owned that he did sell it.

Mr. Garrow. What did he say? - I cannot pretend to say the particular words he made use of.

What did Burchell say he gave for it? - Three shillings, and the prisoner said he only gave him one shilling for it, and that was a shilling's worth of halfpence; part of the hay is here; it is very good hay.

Mr. Garrow. You do not know whether it is Westmoreland hay or not? - I do not.

Before the Justice, this man said he bought all the hay of the prisoner? - Yes.

The prisoner denied it, and said he had only sold him the sweepings for a shilling, because he expected my Lord's waggon with hay in town? - He might say so.

Did not the prisoner give this account of it, that expecting some hay in my Lord's waggon, he had sold the sweepings of the loft, which was the perquisite of the coachman, and received a shilling's worth of halfpence for it? - I cannot recollect that he said so.

Burchell said first, he had nothing in the cart but rubbish? - Yes.

Then he said he bought all the hay of the prisoner? - Yes.

All that you saw put into the cart was a little rubbish? - Yes.

What did Burchell say he bought of the prisoner? - He said he had three trusses of hay.

Did the prisoner ever admit that he received three shillings for three trusses? - Richard Burchell told me so; I did not see the coachman at all before he came before the magistrate.

Did he say before the Justice of Peace, that which I have stated to you many times over? - He might or might not say so; I cannot tell.


Where was you on the morning of the 28th of February last? - In Hayes's Mews.

What did you get there? - Some rubbish.

What else? - There was some hay; I bought it as rubbish.

What do you call rubbish? - Some hay-bands and straw-bands.

What else was in the cart besides? - Three trusses of hay.

Where did you receive them from? - Lord Lonsdale's.

Who delivered them to you? - The prisoner; he was coachman, or something of that kind.

What did you give for them? - Three shillings.

For what did you give it? - For three trusses of hay, and the rubbish.

Mr. Garrow. Mr. Butchell, this was the 20th of February, I take it? - No.

When was it? - The last day of February.

You keep a horse of your own, I suppose? - Yes.

Then you know something of the price of hay? - I did not know it was good hay.

Then you bought it as rubbish? - Yes.

Perhaps you know whether in the service of noblemen, the sweepings and rubbish are the perquisite of the coachmen? - Not as I know of, I never received any.

The watchman asked you what you had got in the cart? - Yes.

What did you tell him? - Rubbish.

Not a word of the three trusses? - No.

So he was uncivil enough to take you into custody? - Yes.

And kept you safe in hold? - Yes.

Had you bought any hay lately before that? - Yes.

Then you know the price in Smithfield market and St. James's? - I did.

Did it bear any better price than one shilling a truss? - Yes, some I give two shillings a truss.

So this you bought for rubbish at one shilling? - Yes.

Was it tied? - Yes.

How much did you give this man for it? - Three shillings.

Did you pay him for it? - Yes, one shilling in half-pence, and two shillings in silver.

How come you to tell the watchman you had not got any in the cart? - I did not know but it was rubbish.

Why could not you have made it rubbish by untying it, and kicking it about a little? - I do not know.


I live with my Lord Lonsdale five years and upwards come October; I sold this man a shilling's-worth of hay bands; that was all I sold; I had no hay bind to sell.

The prisoner called two witnesses who gave him a good character.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-69

Related Material

398. JANE BONNER was indicted for stealing, on the 29th of March last, one black silk cloak, value 21 s. the property of James Gillham .


I live in Earl-street, Seven-dials ; my husband's name is James Gillham; on the 29th of March, I lost a black silk cloak, between seven and eight in the morning; I put it in my box the 28th, which was in one Mrs. Pree's room; I had been moving some things, and I asked her to let me put the box there as they stood in the way; Mrs. Pree lodged in my house; when I missed it, I enquired for it; Mrs. Pree suspected a person, and she was fetched to the house; I asked her whether she had it, and she denied it; I had her taken up on suspicion, and after the Justice had committed her, she owned it; I told her if she had it, to own it, and if she did not, she should suffer the law.

Was the cloak found? - Yes, at one William Carter 's, a pawnbroker's; I was at Carter's when the cloak was found.


I am a pawn-broker; I produce the cloak; it was pawned by the prisoner, on the 28th of March, between five and six in the afternoon, as near as I can remember.

Did you know her before? - Yes, I am sure it was her that pledged it; she lived in Short's-gardens; it is the same that she pledged.

(Deposed to by a seam in the back.)

I am sure it is mine.


I lodge at Mrs. Gillham's; I know the prisoner; on the 28th of March, she was at my room, and came to see me in the morning; in the afternoon she came to see me twice; in that day Mrs. Gillam left a box in my room with some things in it; that was before the prisoner came; I went out and left her in my own room, about four in the afternoon; I might stay about ten minutes.


I was with this person, Mary Ann Pree , otherwise Mary Ann Field , otherwise Mary Ann Teabo ; she goes by three names; she gave me the cloak to pledge; I came to Mrs. Gilham's; this Mrs. Pree, otherwise Field, otherwise Teabo, asked me for something to drink; I said I would have some beer; she chose gin; my child went to sleep; she advised me to go up stairs and lay the child on the bed; the child slept a considerable time; she asked me when the child was abed, to oblige her so far as to carry this cloak to pledge for her, being in her room; I knew nothing of it; I took it to pledge for one shilling; this was in the evening; two people came in, and sat and drank; my husband came to me, and asked me to come home; as soon as the child awoke, I went home along with him; the next morning I met Mrs. Pree, she said, the cloak was too good for her wear, and begged of me to sell it; she told me to get as much as I could; I went there and spoke to the gentlewoman herself; I said half a guinea more; she said, only seven shillings more; I took the seven shillings there, and brought it to her; she stood at the end of Monmouth-street for me; she gave me a couple of shillings; I went a little further and spent some little time; I went again and enquired for this Mrs. Field; I met her; she told me the cloak was not her own; I was terribly frightened, and begged to go home; the next thing she did, they sent a person belonging to the Justice and two women, to know if I knew any thing of the cloak; I was so frightened, I did not know what to do; when I was at the Justice's, and found my infant was going to be torn out of my arms and I sent to prison, I told Mrs. Gillham, on her promising; and afterwards I was committed to this place.

Court to Mrs. Pree. Did you desire her to pawn this cloak? - No, never in my life, upon my sacred oath.

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


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-70
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

399. BENJAMIN BARLAND was indicted for feloniously assaulting Joseph Winckworth , on the King's highway, on the 15th day of April , and putting him in corporal fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one watch, with the inside and outside case made of silver, value 3 l. a steel chain, value 12 d. a base metal seal, value 6 d. his property .

The witnesses examined apart at the request of Mr. Schoen, Prisoner's Counsel.


I was robbed last Sunday night; as near as I can guess, about a quarter past eight; I was in New James-street , facing one Payne's, a butcher; there was no soul near hand; I had been at the publick-house, near where I live, about six, and drank part of two or three penny-worth of crank and a pint of beer, with a person there about eight; I went and knocked at the door; my mother was not at home; she usually goes to church on a Sunday; I went twice again; I went to have a bason of soup; when I came to this Payne's the butcher's, which is next door but one; three lads stepped up to me, two of them said something to me, which I did not understand;

I thought they asked me the name of the street; before I spoke the prisoner sprung about a yard to me and snatched the watch out of my pocket; I had no suspicion of the robbery till the man was gone; I called out stop thief, and kept the high road as he did; the other two run away; I pursued him, he run about thirty yards, and then he was stopped and fell down and got up immediately; I saw him again in two minutes after he was stopped; he cried stop thief, and lurked along.

Mr. Schoen. What are you? - A journeyman carpenter.

This was on Sunday night, I believe? - Yes.

Your mother goes to church of a Sunday night? - Yes.

You go to drink crank instead of going to church with your mother? - Not constantly.

How much had you drank that night? - Part of two or three penny-worth.

Was you sober upon your oath? - I was, upon my oath.

Who advised you to prosecute this poor boy for an highway robbery? - Nobody.

You know there is a reward in this case of forty pounds? - I do not know any thing at all of these things, but I have heard of such things; as to my part I had rather be without the reward; I do not want it; it has been very disagreeable to me; I have not contrived to indict him for a highway robbery.

When they came up to you, you say, you did not suspect their intention to rob you, till the watch was gone? - No.

So that I take it for granted there was no violence used to you? - No, not in the least, it was gone as quick as lightning; I did not know I was robbed till the watch was out of my pocket; I did not understand what the other man said; I lost sight of him entirely, while I fell down; it was about half after eight; the robbery was about two minutes; my watch was snatched as upright as a dart; I was rather frightened.

This was a momentary transaction? - Yes.

The night was very dark? - It was duskish.

Taking all these circumstances together, that the night was dark, that you was frightened, and that the transaction was sudden; I take it for granted, you could not swear to the person who took your watch? - When he stepped up to me, I was underneath a lamp.


I picked up a watch; it wanted a quarter to nine, in New James-street; I did not see the boy nor know him, till he was in the watch-house; I saw one running, but I could not say it was him.

(The watch produced without any outside case.)

Is that the watch that you picked up? - It looks like the same according to the maker's name and number 1265, the name Hayley, to the best of my remembrance; I only looked at it once.

How came you to recollect the number and the maker's name? - Because I was told it afterwards; it appeared to be something towards that number; that is the watch that was delivered to me by the constable.

Prosecutor. This is my watch; I can swear to it.


I heard the cry of stop thief; I caught hold of somebody, but I cannot swear to him.

Was the boy you caught hold of, the same that was carried to the watch-house and secured? - Yes.

Prosecutor. The watch had two cases, one of them is lost.


I live in King's-street, Golden-square; I am a hair-dresser; the prisoner worked with me; he has lived with me twelve months; he never defrauded me of a farthing to the best of my knowledge; he has

one of the best of characters I ever heard; his character was that of a sober, honest, industrious boy; he only left me on the Sunday he was taken up.


I live in Prince's-street, Cavendish-square; I know the prisoner ever since he was with this gentleman; I always knew him to be a very honest good character; I have had reason to trust him in many respects myself, and have found him honest.


Court to Mr. Christie. Will you now, to save the boy's character, take him again? - Yes, I will.

Then you will do a very good and kind thing.

Court to Boy. You owe a great deal to that master of your's; he has saved your life, and saved you from perdition; I hope you will shew that gratititude to him that you owe, by behaving well to him and to every body else; go home and thank your master, and live with him, and do not get to other bad boys. Deliver him to his master.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-71
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

400. MARY KAIN was indicted for stealing, on the 14th of March , a silk purse, value 2 d. and eight shillings in monies numbered , the property of John Dobbins .


On the fourteenth of March, I lost my purse; it was past one in the morning; I was coming from Drury-lane; I went up a court, and a watchman met me and asked me what I had in my basket; I asked him to have a drop of it; I live in Mill-street, Dock-head; I was coming from Drury-lane, from Mr. Tobins's, shoe-maker, No. 13; and the prisoner and another met me; the prisoner handed the bottle to the other woman, and she handed it to the watchman; he handed it to them again; I found the prisoner take the money out of my pocket; I run after her about six or seven yards and caught her; the purse was never found; she was taken to the watch-house; I had the purse half an hour before that in my hand; I am sure it was in my pocket at the time, but there was no button to my pocket; I was as sober as I am now; I laid hold of her; as soon as ever I got up, she cried out, and called me audacious names; she denied having it; her brother came to my house, but I do not know the watchman.

Prisoner. I was coming along, and I met Mrs. Lewis, and we saw this man drinking with several girls, and he followed us and asked us to drink, and we drank, and the watchman drank; then he wanted to go home with me; he told me he had no money to give me, but I should not want for tea, or coffee, or Hollands; I said, I could not take him home; then he said, I robbed him of a purse, with half a guinea and ten shillings in it; Mrs. Lewis is my witness, likewise the two watchmen are here.

MRS. LEWIS sworn.

I live at a chandler's shop, in Drury-lane; I have lodged there a year and an half; I met the prisoner in Drury-lane; I saw her in liquor; I asked to see her home; I knew her very well, and there was a man with a basket and bottle in it, that held about three or four quarts; he asked us to drink; I told him I did not chuse it; he said, I should drink with the watchman; he took hold of it and smelt to it; says the prosecutor, you have no occasion to be afraid of it; it is brandy, and the watchman said it smelt good; then he followed us to Russel-court, and then he asked the other woman to drink; then he followed us into Russel-street, then he bid us a good night; he crossed over to the watchman and came after us, and said, the girl had robbed him; and we were taken to the watch-house and searched all over; he first said, there was ten shillings, then nine, then eight, and some halfpence.


I am a watchman belonging to Covent-Garden.

Who are you appointed by? - By the parish, I have been established these eight years, and better.

Jury. Who is the treasurer of that parish, who pays you? - Mr. Goldin, the corner of Hart-street. On the 14th of March last, about five minutes after two in the morning, I saw the prosecutor talking with the prisoner and Mrs. Lewis at the corner of York-street, I was waiting to be relieved by another man, by and by I saw them part, the two women walked towards Bridge's-street, the man crossed over to me, says he are you a watchman? I want to give you charge of them women; says I, are you joking? says he, it is not a joking matter; accordingly I went after them, and took hold of the prisoner and the other, and took them to the watch-house.

What had the prosecutor in his basket? He had a bottle of brandy.

How do you know? - I saw it at the watch-house, I did not know what it was till I saw it at the watch-house, I never tasted any of it till I came into the watch-house, I tasted it there, I never tasted any thing in the street, he seemed to me to be in liquor.

Court to Dobbins. Is this the watchman you spoke to first? - No, it is not, it is the other watchman.


I saw this man standing the corner of Whitehorse-yard; and these two girls came up to him, and he insisted on this woman's drinking some of the liquor, the girl refused drinking, she told him he was making fun, he had no liquor in the bottle, he said he had a drop of good liquor, and she should drink, I believe the girl drank some, after that they went into Russell court, and left me, I smelt the brandy.

You told the woman she need not be afraid of drinking it? - I did not tell her any such thing.

That is not true then? - No.

Nor you did not drink any of it? - No, I only smelt to it.

You did not taste? - No; my stand is in Whitehorse-yard, I belong to St. Clement's, I am appointed by Mr. Gregg, he pays us.

Do you make a practice of letting men and women drink brandy in the street, and go away together into courts? - He stopped these two women, they were going on, they were off of my beat.

That is the way you take care to preserve good order in the night? - They went out of my parish into Russell-court, the girls would not have stopped him, if he had not stopped them; they did not stop long; I should have moved them if they had not gone into Russell-court.

Court. I hope the Gentlemen that appoint you will be informed of your behaviour as watchman however.


I was going to my day's washing, I live in little Drury-lane, at No. 16, I met the prosecutor the corner of the street, says he I want you; says I, in sup, what will you give me? says he, I will give you a drop of something that is good; says I, no, not without a trifle of money, that will be of no use to my children.

Court. Gentlemen, in this case, the prosecutor himself does not appear in a very respectable light.


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-72
VerdictGuilty > manslaughter
SentenceMiscellaneous > branding

Related Material

401. JOHN ISBISTER was indicted, for that he, not having the fear of God before his eyes, but being moved and seduced by the instigation of the Devil, on the 16th of February last, upon one Amos Gill , in the peace of God and our Lord the King then being, with a certain wooden scull, value 2 s. him, the said Amos, did strike in and upon the left side of his head, giving

him several mortal bruises, of which he languished till the 22d day of February; and languishing did live, and then he the said Amos did die; and so the Jurors say, that the said John Isbister , him the said Amos Gill , of his malice aforethought, did kill and murder .

He was also charged, on the coroner's inquisition, with feloniously killing and slaying the said Amos.


On the morning of the 16th of February, the deceased Mr. Gill was hired by a gentleman to carry some goods on board a vessel, and he having the boat loaded first, was molested by a rope belonging to the ship the Orphan, and the pilot cut it, it blew a strong gale of wind at that time, after that I begged of Mr. Gill to left the rope over the goods as we were very deep loaded, Gill accordingly got up, and lifted the rope over the goods, the boat was full of parcels; and one parcel was struck overboard by the rope, I called out and said to Mr. Gill, hold water if you please, and let us see what it is; he did so, and they gave us no assistance, I called out, pilot why did not you keep your rope up. I said we could not keep the boat a head to wind, with that he called out, if you do not chuse to have the basket picked up it may lay; and I really believe, the prisoner wetted his hands in picking it up, the prisoner was in the pilot's boat along with the pilot, laying by on their scull, words arose, they said we might pick it up ourselves; we told them we could not; d - n your eyes you b - r, says the prisoner, immediately; Mr. Gill held the scull in this manner, and pointed it at them and said, d - n your eyes, and repeated it again, Mr. Gill struck him upon the right shoulder, the prisoner stooped, and took the pilot's scull up, then it was blow for blow, he took and threw the man this way, it was up the third time against me, says I, for God's sake what have you done, you have fractured the man's scull, the man had a leather hat on at the time, he was a fireman belonging to the London Insurance; and a man that bore a respectable character, the people came with bludgeons, I was forced to fly for my life, the poor man was carried on shore, and is since dead, he fell overboard; and must have been drowned, if a man had not taken him out of the water.


I saw the poor man soon after he received the blow on the 16th of February, I found him between the blankets, very wet, and extremely languid; and after waiting some little time, he was still more apparently languid; but he groaned, and gave one or two sighs, I then directed such steps as appeared expedient, a little hartshorn and water, they could not get it down, he shoved the things from his mouth, I was present at the trapanning the scull; and I was present with Mr. Crookshank at the opening the head.

Was he bled immediately upon his being carried to the public house? - No, I did not look upon it justifiable, and Mr. Metford confirmed it, I thought he had received an injury by being in the water, and it was suffocation, his pulse was so extremely low, there was an extravasation in the head.

Have you any doubt that his death was occasioned by the blow he received? - I think, to the best of my opinion, that the extravasation gave rise to it.

Have you any doubt about it? - I do not know, it might be in consequence of his fall into the water.

Was his scull fractured? - No Sir, there was no fracture. I have no doubt but the extravasation was the cause of his death.


That man told how it was, only that he said I struck the man twice, I only struck him once, I did not mean to strike him, till he abused me, and struck me first.

GUILTY, Of Manslaughter .

Guilty of Manslaughter on the Coroners Inquisition.

Branded .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-73
VerdictsGuilty; Not Guilty

Related Material

402. MARY MARTIN was indicted for stealing, on the 18th of February last, one silk gown, value 10 s. two cotton ditto and petticoats, value 3 l. a pair of stays, value 10 s. a handkerchief, value 2 s. a muslin apron, value 2 s. a shawl, value 1 s. four yards of ribband, value 2 s. and a pair of stockings, value 2 s. the property of Margaret Jones , spinster .

And LETITIA COLEMAN was indicted for receiving one cotton gown and petticoat, value 20 s. a pair of silk stockings, value 2 s. and a muslin handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of the said Margaret Jones , knowing them to be stolen .


I live in Wardour-street, Soho ; on Sunday evening, the 18th of February, I was robbed of the things mentioned in the indictment; I saw them the moment before I went out; I was not out above three quarters of an hour, and when I returned they were gone; I did not miss them till the Monday morning; I went out between three and four; I missed some ribband that evening, that was stolen, but I did not miss the remainder of the things then; I have a petticoat belonging to one of the gowns, and the rest is in Court; I found this petticoat on the prisoner, Mary Martin , and there are three gowns in Court, and another petticoat; this petticoat was given me at the Office; Martin was at our house once; she came to make some shifts, or something for my servant; I never saw her but once.


I lived with this lady at the time this was done; I was recommended as a servant to the house; I know nothing further than this; I was in the kitchen, and sent the little boy out of an errand, but how this woman got in I do not know; I did not see her go in; this was in the second floor.


One silk gown and one cotton gown were pawned with me by Eleanor Mitchell , on the 19th of February. I advanced half a guinea upon them, I do not remember she pledged them herself.


I pawned these two gowns with Mr. Batt, I had them from the prisoner Martin, she came to lodge in the house where I live servant, she came on the Sunday night, and had the gowns tied up in a handkerchief, she gave them to me, on the Monday morning, she called me into the room where she lay, and asked me to pawn her two gowns, for her mother was in distress, I pawned them for half a guinea, and brought her the half-guinea and the duplicate, these are the gowns.


On the 20th of February last, Mrs. Coleman brought me a silk gown, a pair of silk stockings, and a handkerchief, I am a pawnbroker; she brought the stockings and handkerchief on the 20th, and the gown on the 21st; and the petticoat the 22d; on the 21st Mary Martin brought me an apron.

Prosecutor. There is no particular mark about the apron.

Look at the black silk gown and the cotton gown? - I know this black gown because it is worn under the arms, I have the cuffs of this cotton gown at home, somebody else has the petticoat, here is the petticoat that belongs to the gown that was at Batt's.

A WITNESS sworn.

I am a pawnbroker in High-street, Marybone; about seven in the evening I received these stays.

Court. Shew Margaret Jones some of the things that Coleman brought you on different days.

M. Jones. I swear to this gown, I have the petticoat of the same.

Prisoner Martin. I have nothing to say.

Prisoner Coleman. She came to lodge with me at night, and in the morning she told me to pawn a handkerchief and a pair of stockings to get a breakfast; the second

day she went out, and sent me to pawn a gown.

The prisoner Coleman called four witnesses, who gave her a good character.


Transported for seven years .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-74

Related Material

403. RICHARD HUGHES was indicted for stealing, on the 19th day of March last, one linen shirt value 6 s. one pair of worsted stockings, value 2 s. a velveret waistcoat, value 3 s. a handkerchief, value 6 s. a silk ditto, value 2 s. the property of David James .


I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, the 19th of March last, that very morning I sent my servant with them tied in a bundle to the washer-woman's, by one whom I cannot find, her name is Francis Hughes , I have not got any of the property again, that I can swear positively to.


I am a washerwoman, this bundle was sent me on Monday morning, a shirt and waistcoat and pair of stockings, and pocket handkerchief tied up in a large striped handkerchief, I received it from the prosecutor's servant, who drew beer, her name is Frances Hughes , I put them in a chair between the chest of drawers and a table at the back part of the house, they lay there all the day, from between seven and eight in the morning, till between four and five in the afternoon, I saw the prisoner come out of my house with them under his left arm between four and five, I was not out of my house three minutes, I called to him as I saw him come out, and I said, master, what have you got there, I directly pursued him; I am positive that that bundle contained the linen of the prosecutor, it was wrapt up in a blue and white striped silk handkerchief.

Could you see that handkerchief when it was under the prisoner's arm? - Yes, I had no bundle below stairs but that.

Was your back door open, so that he or any body else could get in? - I could see him distinctly, I am sure of the prisoner, he was dressed in a blue jacket, striped trowsers, a checque shirt, and a silk handkerchief round his neck.


I went into a chandler's shop the same day between four and five; and coming out, I saw this man come out of the house, and go along with a bundle, I did not know he had stole it then, then the prosecutrix cried stop him, I run after him and lost sight of him, but I knew his face before, I went to the public-house, and sat down to have a pot of beer; and he came in with the handkerchief about his neck, that might be better than half an hour after, when he came out of the house with the bundle, he had a brown handkerchief, with white spots, almost like the India handkerchiefs, the bundle was tied up with this blue silk handkerchief.

When you saw him come out of the public house, did you recollect the handkerchief, or had the woman told you? - No, I knew the handkerchief.

Had you had any description at all by the woman, of the sort of handkerchief before you saw him in the public house? - No, none at all, I mentioned it first.


I took this handkerchief off his neck.

(Produced and deposed to, by Mrs. Barnett.)

I believe it to be the prosecutor's, because he has many of them.

Court to Jones. Was that the handkerchief you saw the bundle tied up in? - Yes, I believe this to be the same.

Prosecutor. I tied up my things in such a handkerchief.


I was at work on board a Greenland-man; I had received some money; and I came into Rosemary-lane to buy some odd things; I went into a publick house to sit down, and they took me; I have had the handkerchief above these five months, I bought it when I came home from Greenland; it is the same, if I was to die this minute, I never robbed anybody, I never was in a prison in my life.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-75

Related Material

404. PATRICK CASEY and FRANCIS BALL were indicted for stealing, on the 24th day of February last, one square seffpool of lead, value 10 s. two yards three inches of leaden pipe, value 6 s. fifty-six pounds weight of lead, value 10 s. belonging to Susannah Gowing , affixed to a certain house of hers .


I am son of Susannah Gowing , that house is in Russell-place , it is an unfinished house; the prisoner Casey was brought to me to the front of the house, without any lead, it having been seized, I missed about half an hundred of lead; and about two yards of pipe, and a sesspool of lead; half an hundred was quite taken away, that was from the flat roof, two yards of pipe were fastened to the wall, the prisoner Ball was taken out of the next house, one small piece of lead was laying on the flat, it was cut away, and some more was found in the back area, the pipe was not found at all, it was taken entirely away, and so was the sesspool head; I was not present when the prisoner was taken.


I am a plaisterer; I was at the taking of this prisoner; as I came through London-street, between eight and nine on the 24th of February, as we came past this house, we heard a dog bark; it was rather darkish; then I asked where Mrs. Gowing lived, while we were consulting, the prisoner Casey came by from the field which adjoins this wall; which was the other side where this flat was, he looked at us very hard; I am sure he did not come from the house, he came from the outside, from a kind of bottom; as soon as he was gone out of sight, I told Jones to knock at the door, the servant came and asked us what we wanted; I told him, I believed they were thieves, he went and found Casey in the same place where he came from, Mr. Cunningham jumped down, and asked him what he wanted there, I looked down and found this hair cloth close to the place where we took him; I went to fetch a candle and lanthorn, it is about one hundred and fifty yards off the place, we examined the whole house, and found one of the pieces of lead on the inside of the house, and the least piece on the table; before that we saw a man laying on the coping, on the flat on his face; I do not know who that man was, Mr. Cunningham spoke directly to lend him a gun to shoot him; in one of the vaults in the front area, in the next house, we found Ball laying double, as if he was asleep, we asked him what he wanted there, he said he had been drinking with some of his shop mates, and had tumbled down the area, and fell fast asleep, we took them both to the public house; and left them to the care of the watchman.


On the 24th of February, between eight and nine, I was at the prosecutor's house, and this Edmunds and Jones came there, and said, there were two men stealing the lead off the flat in London-street, Mr. Gowing and me went with them, Mr. Gowing, and Jones stood at the front of the house, while

Edmunds and me went to the back part of it, when we came to the corner, we just saw a man at the foot of the wall, we immediately rushed down upon him, and he stopped down, I caught him by the collar, and brought him out; I saw the other prisoner Ball lay on the coping of the wall; I did not move him then, but he dropped inside; and I went and took him; there was no other to be found in the house, we called him several times to come down, and he would not stir, then I said, go, fetch a gun, and we will soon bring him down; the wall is 16 feet high, but there is a leaded flat about the middle of it; after we took the prisoners, we all went and examined the lead; the lead was all gone but these two pipes, this pipe was on the flat; it has been measured, and it corresponded, I saw it tried.

Court to Gowing. I suppose you cannot swear to the lead particularly? - No more than by its sitting the place.


I was a porter in Covent Garden, and a young man gave me a shilling to carry a trunk from the Green Man to the Adam and Eve; I staid an hour, and so he gave me some drink; and I wandered about, and came past this house; and I sat down; and this man came directly and found me.


I met with some of my shop mates, who came with Admiral Hood from the West Indies, I went a drinking with them all the whole day in the afternoon; I got rather too much liquor; I tumbled down in the area; and there I lay when these people found me; it was day light when I tumbled down there.



Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-76
SentenceCorporal > private whipping

Related Material

405. JANE, the wife JOHN BRUCE , was indicted for stealing, on the 9th day of April , seventeen cotton and linen handkerchiefs, value 20 s. the property of George Robinson .


I live at the seven dials; I keep a linen draper's shop ; I lost seventeen cotton and linen handkerchiefs; on Monday the 9th of April; at about four in the afternoon, two women came into my shop; about eight in the evening, they both returned, and told me they had paid me sixpence too much; I convinced them of the mistake; they had no sooner got out of the door, but some person opened the door, and said, they had robbed me; I immediately stepped out, and the other woman having a child, I concluded this was the person that had the property; accordingly I took her with the seventeen handkerchiefs upon her; she had them and whisked them altogether, and clapped them under her cloak under her arm.

(Produced and deposed to.)


I am not guilty; as I was coming out of the shop, with my landlady, a woman came in by the side of me and catched them off, and dropped them down by the side of me in the street.


Privately Whipped .

Court. When are you to be brought to bed? - I do not know that I have a minute to go.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-77
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

406. JOSEPH COOK , otherwise WRIGHT , was indicted for stealing, on the 14th day of April, 1786 , one silver watch, value 3 l. two stone seals, set in base metal, value 4 s. one brass watch key, value 1 d. the property of Michael Taylor , in his dwelling-house .


I live in Bentick-street ; I lost a watch on Friday last was a twelvemonth, out of my dwelling-house, out of my back parlour; I saw it there that day, between eleven and twelve in the morning; the prisoner and George Townsend came to my house to see a lodging, and they afterwards wished to see the conveniences; I took them down to see the front kitchen and the wine cellar; they approved of them both; we had a little conversation about being country men; and after that, to tell you the truth, Sir, this lodging is not for myself, it is for a friend, a Mr. Ridley, a relation of Sir Matthew White Ridley, a good hearty fellow; says he, we shall call on you to-morrow about this time, and bring him with us; on saying so, I looked on the other side of the chimney-piece where the watch was; the watch was hanging; says he, is there ever a coach-stand in this street; I told him there was; says he, I believe he would like to have the use of your front parlour for one or two mornings in a week; and he asked to see the parlour; I took him out to see the parlour; he approved of it; as we were coming out of the front parlour, I met the prisoner, whom I had left in the back room where the watch was; and they went away and bid me a good morning; I went into the back room again, and there was no watch, the watch was gone; I immediately recollected the watch was there when I went with the other into the front parlour, and left this prisoner in the back parlour.

Court. How long were you and the other in the front parlour? - About three months afterwards, I met the other prisoner; I took him, and he was tried and convicted here, at the sessions following, for stealing this watch, and being connected with the prisoner; I should have taken this man, but he ran into a house and made his escape out of the garret window; I happened since to meet with him.

Mr. Garrow, prisoner's counsel. So this extraordinary fact happened on Good Friday, 1786? - Yes.

You immediately went out to pursue them? - I did, and could not find them; I went down to Bow-street, and described the man and the watch; I believe I did.

Have you any doubt about it, because you talk of believing? - I am not sure Sir, I know I went down to Bow-street that same day.

Did you not immediately then of course describe the two men? - Yes, I believe I did give a description of two men; I did give a description.

Was a part of their description, that they were very elegantly dressed? - I do not recollect that; Townsend was very well dressed; this man was not so well dressed.

Upon your oath was not a part of your description that these men were elegantly dressed? - I will not say that, I do not recollect that; I thought they had taken up a great deal of time in shewing the lodging, but they had not taken up much time since they looked at the watch.

In July, you accidentally met with Townsend for the first time? - I did.

No notice of him in consequence of your information from Bow-street? - No, it was accidentally; I fixed on him at a very great risque of my life.

I believe you stumbled on this man too, in the street by accident? - Yes.

Be so good as to state to my Lord and the Jury, what was the first thing you said to him when you met him? - I was going on Dean-street; I thought he was the man, so I passed him and went to the opposite corner of Compton-street, and there I staid and viewed him, then I was sure; he saw me look at him; he immediately walked off to Green-street.

My question is this, did not you say to this man, am I right or am I wrong; is not your name Wright? - No, I said to him, and I laid my hand on my shoulder, how do you do Mr. Wright? says he, my name is Cook; says I, it does not signify what your name is, I believe you are an

acquaintance of Mr. Townsend's, and you took an opportunity to take away my watch; he immediately said, he knew nothing about it; he went with me before the Magistrate, but very unwillingly; I was certain, though I said I believed.

Pray, if it is not an impertinent curiosity, may I ask you what way of life you are in? - What way of life! I am employed by the board of navigation in making astronomical and nautical calculations for them.

I rather think you attach yourself more to the study of the stars than mens faces? - That is no business of your's.

I dare say if you had a question about the Georgium Sidus, you could resolve us? - I could tell you a great deal more about the Georgium Sidus than you know. Townsend was was found guilty on my charge, 39 s.


I am servant to Mr. Taylor; on Good Friday, 1786, the prisoner at the bar and another man, came to our house to look at a lodging; I opened the door and acquainted Mr. Taylor; then I went down stairs, and in a little time after they came down stairs, the prisoner came into the middle kitchen where I was; there are three kitchens.

Are you sure he is the same man? - Yes; I took very particular notice of him; I thought he did not look like a person that wanted a first floor; I am very sure it is him; he was very shabbily dressed, and he said that was a genteel kitchen, and every thing was very pretty and very convenient; I know nothing more.

Mr. Garrow. You thought these two people very impertinent in taking up so much of your master's time? - No.

You thought they did not want a first floor; the other was not shabbily dressed? - Very genteel; this man was not very genteelly dressed.

Have you never said they were both very genteely dressed? - I never said that.

What other servant does Mr. Taylor keep? - He has none but myself; he has a wife.

You are the only servant in the house? - There are other servants besides myself, but not belonging to Mr. Taylor.

How long have you lived in his service? - Almost three years.

You came with him from the North? - No, I did not.

You are the only servant he has? - Yes.

You did not see this man again for a twelve-month? - No.

Did you ever see me come to take a lodging? - No.

Have you had many people come to look for lodging? - No.

How many short of five or six hundred? - Not half a dozen.

Not in three years? - That is not surprising.

It surprises me? - I am not surprised at all; - I am sure it is the man.

Was you as sure to Townsend? - Yes, I was; I swore positively to him.

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

GUILTY, 39 s.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-78

Related Material

407. SAMUEL OLIVER was indicted for stealing, on the 16th of March last, two shillings, of the proper coin of this realm, value 2 s. the property of Jonathan Stirtevant .


The prisoner was my shopman seven months, I keep a hosier's shop in Bishopsgate-street , I had a good character with him, I suspected him, and mentioned it to a friend of mine, Mr. Lock, and he proposed

to mark some money, and send a person to buy some stockings. Here is the prisoner's writing in this book (reads) one pair of women's black hose, 2 s. one pair of women's cotton, 2 s. 3 d. dated the 16th of March; that is the entry of goods sold, it does not mention to whom they were sold; there were more women's stockings sold the same day.


In consequence of some suspicion entertained by the prosecutor I marked some silver, 7 s. on the 16th of March last; after I had marked them, I sent a young woman, Sarah Lock , that lives at my house, to buy three pair of stockings of Mr. Stirtevant, and a pair of garters; she brought me the three pair of stockings and a pair of garters, I gave her the marked shillings; nobody knew the marks but myself, I did not tell her of them, she brought 3 d. back, the goods came to 6 s. 9 d.

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council. This money was sent in order that it might be taken? - Yes.


I received 7 s. from the last witness to go and buy three pair of stockings and one pair of garters of Mr. Stirtevant; I saw the prisoner in the shop, nobody else was in the shop; I bought two pair of black women's hose, at 2 s. a pair, one pair of white cotton at 2 s. 3 d. a pair; and one pair of garters at 6 d. that made 6 s. 9 d. in all, I paid him 7 s. and he gave me 3 d. change; I gave him the same 7 s. as Mr. Lock gave me, I kept them different from my own.

(The book handed up to the Court.)

Court to Prosecutor. This is the book where the goods sold are entered from day to day? - Yes.

Did you compare the account of that day's sale with your goods? - I compared it with the next article that was sold afterwards, and there was 2 s. 6 d. short; the goods were put down at 2 s. 6 d. less.

Is there no other women's hose put down the same day? - There are after that was found out, and after the prisoner was taken up; there are two more entries in his hand writing; he was taken up three or four hours after; there appears to be five or six different entries by the prisoner, the rest was made by a brother of mine who is now in the shop; when I found the deficiency in the account, I went out and informed Mr. Lock and another person, that I supposed he had the money upon him; they came in and I charged him with it, and he immediately pulled out two shillings of the marked money, and threw them on the table, there was another shilling he had in his pocket, and he said that was his own; Mr. Lock took up the two shillings, and said, those were them he sent Sarah Lock with to buy the stockings.

Mr. Lock. I have had the two shillings in my possession ever since; he took out 3 s. and said one was his own; I took up two of the shillings, and said, they were those that I had marked, they were the same that I marked.

Mr. Garrow to Prosecutor. How much was in the till at the time this happened? - There was half a guinea in gold, three half crowns, and three sixpences, and eighteen-pence in halfpence; I left it so the night before.

Court. Then what became of the other 4 s? - I had paid them away in change, I took them from the till, they were in the till the same morning they were compared with the other two.

Mr. Garrow. My question to you is, when you called in Mr. Lock, and enquired into the state of your till, what money was there in the till? - There was three half crown pieces, half a guinea and five marked shillings, and I believe another shilling and two sixpences, which was taken for a quarter of a yard of baize.

There was half a guinea, that you are clear in? - Yes, three half crowns and six shillings, I do not know how many sixpences, whether two or three sixpences, I cannot be positive, I think it was more than one; there was eighteen pennyworth of halfpence according to my recollection.

Mr. Garrow. This man has lived with you about seven months? - Near seven months.

Court. Did he use to buy and sell for you? - Yes.

Are these his letters in the margin of the book? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. I believe you have at times told this lad that he should not be prosecuted? - Never.

Perhaps you never told him, it now lays at my option to prosecute you, and you may depend upon it I certainly shall, unless you give me an account? - I never told him any thing of the kind.

Court to Sarah Lock . You bought these stockings of the prisoner, and paid him for them? - I did.

How long did you stay in the shop after you had paid him? - I came out immediately as soon as I had paid the money.

You gave him seven shillings? - Yes, he took the three pence out of the till, he gave it me after I gave him the seven shillings; I gave them him altogether, and he put them in the till.

Did you see him put them in the till? - Yes, I did.

Are you sure of that? - Yes, he put them in first, and took out the threepenny worth of halfpence, and gave them to me.

Did you see what he did with the till afterwards? - No, I came out of the shop immediately, I am quite sure he put them in the till, I took notice, because I understood I was sent to try whether he would take this money or no, therefore I observed what he did.

Mr. Garrow. How came you not to mention this before? - I was not asked it.

Did you hear the oath? - Yes.

Did you know the marks of the shillings at all? - No.

How came you not to look at the marks? - He marked the money and gave it me, he bid me keep it different from my own, and I did; he told me the reason for which I was carrying it.

Prisoner. I leave it entirely to my Counsel.

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


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Court. I think it right in the circumstances of this case to pronounce sentence on this prisoner before he leaves the bar; I am perfectly satisfied with the verdict of the Jury; it appears to me to be founded on very clear and satisfactory evidence, and therefore having no doubt of your guilt, it is my duty, with whatever reluctance I may do it in this particular case, to administer the law with that rigour which the nature of the case deserves. The offence of servants in general, robbing their masters, and more especially those that are entrusted with the property of their masters, is a crime which so entirely cuts up every bond of civil society, that it is the duty of the Courts of Justice, at all times to punish it with severity; the Court therefore think you ought not to remain any longer in this country, and the sentence upon you is, that you be

Transported beyond the seas for seven years .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-79

Related Material

408. EDWARD WALTON , alias WALKDEN was indicted for stealing on the 18th day of April , ten wash-balls, value 2 s. two pots of pomatum, value 5 d. one lady's toupee, value 5 s. two leather powder bags, value 8 d. one square piece of persumed soap, value 12 d. the property of Joseph Hall .


I saw a man stand, the door was open, and a glass sash that was on the inside to inclose the goods, was open; a few minutes before, I said, Sir, do you want any body? he said no; I asked him again, have you seen Mr. Hall? he said he had, he was going out of the door, and I saw something white in his hand; I desired him to walk in, and let me call Mr. Hall, and he dropped the things in the shop, leather bags and hair, what they call them I do not know, the prisoner is the man.

Are you sure? - Yes, I am quite sure, I saw him a good while, I did not pick them up nor touch them, somebody else picked them up, I secured him, he was never out of my sight more that a foot, I told him I would blow his brains out, and he dropped the things.


About eight on Wednesday evening, I called at the prosecutor's house; I had been about two minutes in the parlour, I heard a noise knocking and calling in the shop; when I came into the shop, the witness Jordan was charging the prisoner with a theft of leather bags, and a bundle of hair; the prisoner took a soap-ball out of his pocket, he said he had but that one, but he pulled several more out.

Prosecutor. This is my soap, I have every reason to believe it was in the shop, the glasses where my perfumery was were moved from their places.

Prisoner. They were laying at the door, and I took them up.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-80

Related Material

409. THOMAS LARNEY and WILLIAM SHAW were indicted for stealing, on the 11th day of April , four bushels of coals, value 3 s. the property of Thomas Scott , Esq.

(The case opened by the counsel for the prosecution.)


I know the prisoners only as to the driving of the carts of Thomas Scott , Esq. of Hoxton; these two men were driving these two carts; they were loaded with coals; I saw it; they came down Old-street , and their carts were coming along; there was a dust-cart belonging to Mr. Hand's opposite to me; there was a couple of large baskets, which I believe they call bushel baskets; Shaw took the baskets out of the dust-cart; the servants followed him; he called out, bring them baskets back; he said, I must pay a pot of beer; out came the master, and bid him return to his work; Mr. Hands followed these two carts, with the two drivers, the prisoners; they stopped at the White Hart, Old-street, the corner of Bunhill Row; they went into the public house; they staid about ten minutes; the baskets were left at the outside of the door; Shaw carried these baskets into this public house empty; the prisoners returned out of the public house; the little one got into the cart nearest the public house; Shaw stood at the tail of the cart; him in the cart handed out a great large coal; the other, Shaw, received it, and handed it into the public house; they proceeded again for some time; then they got into another cart, and handed it as they would hand bricks; they staid some trifle of time, and they came out to drive their carts away; Hand's man went into the White Hart, and brought out a large basket full of coals; he carried it up into his master's premises, into the yard; there was a large coal in the basket; they call them large bushel baskets; the servant returned without any basket, and went into the White Hart; he came out with another basket loaded with coals, but not so high piled; I suspected them; they stopped to take in some timber; I thought I would follow them, to see who the carts belonged to;

when I came there, I saw they belonged to Mr. Scott of Hoxton; one was 21,000, the other, 12,508.

Court. When did Hand's servant join them again, or how? - I cannot say; I saw Hand's servant go into the public house; the same servant.

Court. Where did you stand to see all this? - Looking out of the window, as I generally do, after I have eat my dinner.

How far from your window might this White Hart be? - It lays to the left visible enough to distinguish, with the windows open, into the tap room; I saw both the prisoners employed in it.


I am clerk to the brick-kiln at Hoxton; the prisoners drove teams that day for Mr. Scott; they went out in the morning; I ordered them to fetch coals up; they were Mr. Scott's coals; it was on Wednesday week, I think, each of them were to bring a load of coals from White Friars to Hoxton, from a yard that belongs to Mr. Scott.


I was in the public house; I never saw any thing of the coals.


I went and had a slice of bread and cheese; we had a pot of beer, and went out again directly.

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



Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-81
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

410. JACOB LEVY and ANGEL LEVY were indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Francis Perry , about one in the night, on the 28th day of March last, and burglariously stealing therein 32 lb. weight of wool, value 15 s. the property of the inhabitants of the parish of Mile-end, Old Town.

A second count, laying it to be the property of John Smallwood and William Bowditch .

(The witnesses examined apart.)


I live at the workhouse; I am the master of it; on the 28th or 29th, the workhouse was broke open, how I cannot tell, but there was a large hole made through the brick-work, sufficient for any person to go through; I saw it whole on the 28th; the hole was not there then; I always go through the whole house every night, before I go to bed; whether it is ten, eleven, or twelve; that night, according to custom, I went to bed between ten and eleven, and the key was taken into my bed-room; the wall was safe when I went to bed; I got up about six; I was alarmed by my daughter; I came down stairs and found a large hole in the wall, and the bricks apart and piled up one on another, to prevent any body else going through; the hole was large enough for any one to go through; the door was broke open which went into the stair-case, the key of which was in my pocket; we have a cobler's stall in the work-house, and that furnished them with a pair of pincers and that wrenched open the door; from thence was taken, I suppose, between thirty and forty pounds of wool; as soon as this happened, I sent word to two gentlemen that we do business for in the spinning way, and in consequence I was sent to; and there I saw the wool and the prisoners.


I am a worsted maker and hosier; the prisoner Jacob came to me on Friday week; the prisoner came to me and pulled a slip of wool out of his pocket, and asked me if I would buy it, I said it looks as if it had been laid upon; he said, he knew nothing about it, it belonged to a man at the other end of the town, who had got a quantity;

he said, our sabbath will begin soon, will it make any difference if I bring it on Monday; and he came on Monday, and he says, there Sir is the fair sample; I weighed it, and agreed with him for seven pence a pound; but he says, eight-pence; I saw him again about five or six on Friday, he brought a bag; says he, here is the work; he opened the bag; says he, where shall I put it; I said, empty it out; I found a parcel which had been delivered up for what we call twitches; having had information from Perry, I put it into the scale and weighed it, and it weighed thirty-two pounds and a half; says I, I will send down to the master of the work-house, and if it is not his, I may buy it; says the prisoner, I will carry the note myself; no, no, says I, I have people enough myself to carry it; I let the prisoner go that time; the prisoner Angel was behind him when he came to offer the wool, but I never saw him after; Jacob came to me that evening, and asked me if I had any suspicion; says he, if you have, stop me; he then went away, and the next morning I expected him, but a woman came for the money; I did not see Jacob till Saturday, then he came and brought another man with him; I saw the prisoner Angel in the street at that time; he did not come in with him on the Saturday; the tall one came for the payment of some goods; says I, I must be under the necessity to stop you; to stop me, says he, why you might have stopped me yesterday if you pleased; says I, I have now a full authority; we sent for an officer and I took him; as we were going to Whitechapel, I saw the prisoner Angel; I run after him and cried out, stop thief; I took him and brought him to the Justice; I am sure the tall one is the man that offered me the wool, and brought it to my house; I am sure the other was with him the first time.

How near was Angel to your house, when Jacob came for the money? - It might be a stone's throw; the wool is here.



I am in the work-house belonging to this woman; this wool belongs to the workhouse; I make it up myself; I am sure this is the wool that was in the work-house in March last; this is the lad's making up that is at the door.

Court. You do not know the wool, but from from its being made up in these bundles? - No, other people make it up differently.


I belong to the work-house; I know this wool is my own making up.

How long have you made up for the work-house? - Before the 28th of March, a good deal.


I am one of the Church-wardens; this is what we employ our poor with.


I have a great deal to say for myself; I was going to the other end of the town, crying old clothes; a sea-faring man called me into a publick-house, and asked me to buy this wool; he asked nine-pence a pound; I offered him sixpence, and gave him seven-pence; I came to Mr. Bennet and asked him to buy it; he said, he could not tell how to buy it by that sample; he offered me eight-pence a pound for it; I brought the wool, he was not at home; I left the wool, and called again in an hour; he then came home and put it in the scale; it weighed thirty-two pounds and a half; then he put it into a large basket, and went backwards and called his servants, and said, I think this wool is stolen; says I, you may stop me; no says he, I do not wish to stop you, you may call tomorrow, about ten o'clock in the morning; I went, and the young woman said, you must call yourself; says I, it is our sabbath, and I dare not touch money; when I came there, they stopped me and the other gentleman too.


I only went with my brother through curiosity hearing my brother was stopped; I know nothing about it.

Court to Smallwood. What is the value of this wool? - About seven-pence a pound; there was about thirty-four pound.


GUILTY, But not of the burglary .

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

[Transportation. See summary.]

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-82

Related Material

411. JOSEPH PEARCE was indicted for stealing, on the 6th day of April , a handkerchief, value 1 s. a pair of stockings, value 1 s. a neckcloth, value 10 d. the property of John Sparing .


I am a labouring man , I live at Ealing ; on Monday last I lost the things mentioned in the indictment; I was at my labour.


The prosecutor lodged at my house, and the prisoner and another young man; on Monday last the prisoner came home between twelve and one in the day, I saw him go up stairs, which he never did before, he lodged three weeks there, he staid five minutes, and he brought down a piece of old sack, which he said was his; he went out of doors directly, I followed him, I thought he had got something, I followed him to the pawn-broker's shop, he staid a few minutes, and I went into the shop before he came out, and asked the woman what he had brought, and she said a pair of stockings and a neck-cloth; he wanted me to come home and let him in, but I would not, he came out of the shop with me, but I would not let him in; he pulled the things out of his pocket, and threw them into the yard; he wanted me to take the things of him, I saw him take out the things.

What became of him, did he go away? - Yes, and I sent for a constable; I picked up the things, they are here.


I am headborough, I have a pair of stockings and a neck-cloth; I was called last Monday by this woman, I went and saw the prisoner, and she had some things in her hand, which she said the prisoner had thrown down; I took him into custody by her desire.

Court to Prosecutor. How did you get the man again? - I followed him till the constable came.

(The things deposed to.)


I never saw the things, the prosecutor did not know his own property before the Justice; we were before the Justice three times.

Court to Prosecutor. How is that? - The first time I told the Justice I would not wish to hurt any man in the world; says he I can do nothing in it, unless you can swear to your property; we came back to the public-house, and had a pot of beer. the man was in a passion, he swore to his dam - n, if we did not prosecute him, he would prosecute us; then I went and swore to my property.


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-83

Related Material

412. PETER CRITCHLEY was indicted for stealing, on the 10th day of March last, one wicker basket, value 6 d. two pair of linen sheets, value 20 s. one table-cloth, value 3 s. the property of Thomas Vaughan .


On the morning I loaded my cart a little before five, I came from Enfield to

Chancery-lane , I stopped to unload my cart at Mr. Vaughan's house, it was last Saturday was six weeks, about nine in the morning; I brought linen and china, and small wood for firing, when I drove up to the door, I knocked and undid my rope that tied down this basket and box, the maid opened the door, I took the box off and carried it into the passage, when I returned to the cart the basket was gone.

Are you positive sure that you saw the basket at the time that you took in the box? - When I undid the rope, I am sure the basket was on the cart, I did not stay in the house above a minute or two at most; there were sheets and table-cloths in the basket, this is the basket; upon missing it I looked up and down Chancery-lane, I could not see a soul, I had not seen the prisoner before, I turned up Carey-street, there I saw the prisoner turn the corner to go down Bell-yard, I took him and brought him back, and asked him where he was going with that basket; he said he was going to carry it; I said then he should carry it back again; in about ten yards a man came up in a green coat, and asked what was the matter, I told him; he bid me not tear his shirt; I told him I would tear his flesh if he wanted to go away; this is the basket.

Do you know that these things were in the basket? - Yes, because we opened the basket when the thief was taken, I saw it opened, and my mistress and me packed them up over night, they are all marked; it was as full as ever the basket would hold.


I am wife to Mr. Vaughan, these are my husband's property, these are the sheets I packed up over night.


A person gave them me to carry, he promised me a shilling to carry them to the Adelphi in the Strand, and in two or three hundred yards I was stopped; the man was not six or seven yards before me, I told him to take that man that was before me.

Court to Warner. How far from Carey-street is Mr. Vaughan's house? - Just opposite.

Was the prisoner running or walking? - He trotted along, there was nobody else in the street; after I took him, a man in a green coat came up, he seemed to come from Temple-bar way.

Then supposing the man had gone on with the basket, this man would have met him? - Yes, that man came to my master's, and staid there a good bit, he pretended to assist, but I did not give him any encouragement.

Prisoner. I had the parcel given into my hands to carry; a person was with me, he is here, but I cannot rightly say his name.

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


Transported for seven years .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-84

Related Material

413. ANN SMITH and CATHERINE JOHNSON were indicted for stealing on the 3d of March last, fifteen yards of printed callico, value 3 l. the property of Thomas Ashby and Joseph Osborne , privily in their shop .


I had a partner, the partnership was dissolved the 24th of March, his name was Joseph Osborne ; on Saturday the 3d of March I was robbed, I only speak to my property, I found the prisoner in custody.

Who was in the shop with them then? - There was all my people.


I am shopman to Mess. Ashby and Osborne at Holborn-bridge , I remember seeing the two prisoners on the 3d of March, they came into the shop together, between

ten and twelve; I think it was after eleven, they asked for some muslins and prints, neither could be agreed for, and they went out; they looked at both and at different prints; I suspected them, and sent Henry Die to fetch them back.

What excited your suspicion? - They tumbled the things over the counter more than generally is the case, and asked for a number of things from the poles, which induced me to turn round; they were brought back in five minutes; they had not dropped any thing by the way; we found the things when they got into the shop after they came back; when the goods were taken from them they were given to me; I did not see the goods taken from them; he gave the things to me to feel that they were quite warm, and they were quite warm; after the goods were taken the prisoner Johnson pressed me to let her go repeatedly, and said it was the first time she was guilty.

Did the other prisoner say nothing? - No, only begged for the other, not for herself; they bid for the goods as for the prisoner Smith, and she bid me twenty-shillings for the gown as they were going out.

Did you see them take any thing? - No, I did not; but turning short, the principal reason of my suspicion turned upon Catherine Johnson , she made a great sumbling under her petticoats; I saw that, but I did not see her secret any goods.

Prisoner's counsel. This is a capital offence, I believe you know? - Yes.

Was there any mark on the goods? - Yes; I did not see them searched.

HENRY DIE sworn.

I was out of the shop when the prisoners came in; I came in while they were in the shop; I was in doors about five minutes; then I was sent out; the prisoners went out first; Mr. Harding sent me out to bring the prisoners back; I suspected they would take something, and I looked strictly to them; I observed a bustle, but could not see them take any thing; I looked as strictly as I possibly could; I follow- them; when I stopped the prisoners, they were just above Ely-place, on the other side of the way, about two hundred yards from our house; I went up to the prisoner Johnson, and told her, I was persuaded she had something about her that was not her own property; she immediately told me if I supposed so, she would go back with me; she immediately turned back; I observed her to put her hand into her pocket hole as she went in at the shop door; I desired her to walk into the back shop; she went forward till she went into the middle shop where she had been looking at these goods; she immediately made a stop and said, look here, may be the goods are here; and she attempted to pull some of the goods off the counter, and drop this by them; I desired her to walk forward, and she dropped the goods from her lost side; I took them from the side of her left leg; I saw them drop, and took them from her quite warm; I saw them slip down from the side of her petticoat; they were standing under her petticoat when I took them up.

Do you swear you saw them drop from under her petticoat? - I saw them drop, and took them up immediately as she was endeavouring to get away from me.

Did you or not see them drop from her petticoat? - I saw them drop under her petticoat, and took them up immediately.

Did you see them drop from the lower edge of her petticoat or not? - I saw the end of them below the edge of her petticoat; I saw them drop; I observed they were warm.

Supposing they had not been warm, should you have been certain they had dropped from under her coats? - I took them standing up under her coats.

Whether were they in a package or loose? - They were loose.

Then how could they stand up against her legs? - They were just as they are now, not in a package.

Who else were in the shop besides you and Hardy? - There was another young man in the shop; he is not here.

Why not? - He did not see any thing of it.

That he ought to tell us.

Prisoner's counsel. This young woman was very willing to come back again? - Yes.

You observed a bustle at her petticoat? - Yes.

You could not see them drop through the petticoat? - No.

How came you not to go up to the woman at that time? - It is what we never do; I did not know but what they might have bought something; it did not strike me so go up to the woman.

(The things deposed to by Mr. Ashby.)

This mark has been put on this twelve months or more, it is my own hand writing, No. 2.


When we came home the gentleman said, they might be his things, but he could not swear to them; and that gentleman that stands up now, said hanging was too good for us, and hang us he said he would, if he could; and he took out a pencil, and made a mark.

Prosecutor. I have no doubt in the world of the things.

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



Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-85
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

414. RICHARD PARKER GEORGE KETCH , and SARAH ROBINSON were indicted, for feloniously making, coining and counterfeiting one piece of false copper money, to the likeness of a halfpenny, against the statute .

(The case opened by the counsel for the prosecution.)


I went to a house in Gloucester-Court, St. James's-street , on the 16th of March , sometime after four in the afternoon; after getting past the woman that was at the door, I immediately went into the cellar, on the right hand there is a vault, I heard somebody at work; I opened the door, and against the door there was a large coarse cloth, I pulled the cloth on one side, there was Ketch and this woman, he had the end of the fly in his hand, ready to pull it, it was a large press, the dies were fixed in it, and a quantity of half-pence round it, the fly passed over her head; Ketch was without his shirt, and a nasty greasy dirty flannel waistcoat on, or something like it; the woman was without a cloak and an hat, and as black as a chimney sweeper; she was feeding the die; there was a candle burning by the press; the prisoner Parker was sitting in the same box, rounding the edges of the blank with this tool. (Produced.) He blew out the candle as soon as he could, he was in his shirt sleeves tucked up; and in a flannel waistcoat, all their clothes lay in that cellar where they were at work; and afterwards they put them on, and every one owned their own clothes, I found there a quantity of blanks, and some that were finished.

What dies did you find there? - Here are a quantity, a dozen or two I believe.

Was there a compleat apparatus to make the halfpence? - All, but the cuttingout press, which is generally done at a different place.

Mr. Garrow, prisoner's counsel. The man is indicted by the name of Ketch, and the woman by the name of Robinson? - Yes.

Have you any reason to believe that they are man and wife? - No, I have no reason to believe they are.

Do you know whether they pass as such? - No, they did not.

Have you any apparatus here that will produce a halfpenny? - Yes.

Have you any apparatus here that will produce a halfpenny? - Yes.

Have you got dies? - Yes.

Have you got any flies? - No, somebody has stole the fly away; when I saw that press it was complete for coining; this bag is made on purpose for colouring halfpence.


I produce a pair of dies that were fixed in the press; when I went down they were all in the cellar, and Mr. Clarke was with them; the dies were set; I took the press entirely to pieces myself; it was entirely complete; all these were struck from that die; there were near twenty pounds worth in tale.


I found all the three people together; I went down to the cellar; Ketch was without his clothes, with a sort of a brown smock frock, just to cover his skin; Parker was without his clothes, except a flannel waistcoat, and very dirty; the woman without a bonnet and cloak; with very dirty hands and face; the prisoners were brought up stairs; I searched Parker, and found some halfpence in the fob of his breeches, which I believe you will find were struck from the same die; when they were brought to the Brown Bear , the woman had a thumb stall on with some wool in it; two or three halfpence were found on Ketch, which were not struck from the same die, and a paper with some cecil in it.

Mr. Garrow. Was you ever a button-maker? - No.

Did you ever see any button-makers at work? - No.

Court to Clarke. Did you ever know any thumb-stalls used? - No.

Prisoners. We leave it to our counse.


Each fined 1 s. and imprisoned twelve months in his Majesty's jail of Newgate .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-86
VerdictNot Guilty > no prosecutor

Related Material

415. SAMUEL FLETCHER was indicted for stealing, on the 12th of October last, one silver watch, value 30 s. the property of Samuel Harris .

The prosecutor not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-87

Related Material

416. WILLIAM BALE was indicted for stealing, on the 15th day of March last, one muslin handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of John Frere .


On Thursday, the 15th of March last, on passing the Old Bailey to Snow-hill, I lost a twitch at my pocket; I turned round and said, you rascal you have picked my pocket; the person I addressed myself to, took to his heels and ran; the person was dressed the same as the prisoner is now; I cried out stop thief, somebody cried out, Sir, and held the handkerchief, which was given to me by some person who picked it up in the street; I know nothing of the thief.


I keep the Star at the top of the Old Bailey, I was standing at my door, and heard a person cry out, stop thief; I saw the prisoner throw the handkerchief down in the street, I made a catch at him but missed him; he was in a brown great coat, he ran down Green-arbour-court, towards Fleet-market; he was stopped at the top of the steps called Break-neck-steps; there was a man coming up the steps with a chest of drawers, that stopped the prisoner from going down, which enabled me come up to him.


I live in Green-arbour-court, I am a watchmaker, I was standing to see the

house pulled down; I heard the prosecutor say he had had his pocket picked, and I saw the prisoner throw the handkerchief down, I picked it up, and gave it to the prosecutor; that is all that I know.

(Produced and deposed to by the prosecutor.)


I was coming by the corner, and saw the handkerchief lay on the ground, and was running to see what was the matter, and the people took hold of me; I know nothing of it.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-88

Related Material

417. THOMAS DUNN was indicted for stealing, on the 8th day of March last, two pair of cotton stockings, value 3 s. three pair of worsted ditto, value 4 s. two cotton handkerchiefs, value 2 s. 6 d. the property of William Buxstone .


I live at No. 131, Bishopsgate Without ; on Thursday the 8th of March, about half past six in the evening, I saw the prisoner and another boy lurking about the shop-door; I was serving two customers, and the prisoner came into the shop, and snatched the goods off the counter; Mr. Davis brought the prisoner and the goods back directly; there were two pair of cotton stockings, and three pair of worsted stockings.

(The things produced and deposed to.)


I am a silversmith and jeweller in Bishopsgate-street; I live facing the prosecutor; I was at my door, and saw the prisoner and another at Mr. Buxstone's window, which gave me some suspicion that they were upon no good; I saw the prisoner go in the shop the last of the two, and he came out immediately with some handkerchiefs and stockings, but I did not see the other come out of the shop; I pursued him, and saw him drop them in the coach-way, at which time he fell, and I took him and the property to Mr. Buxstone's; they were all over dirt; the dirt is now upon them.

Jury. Were they tied in that handkerchief? - No, they were pinned together for shewing in the window.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-89
VerdictsNot Guilty; Guilty

Related Material

418. JOHN CLEW was indicted for stealing, on the 10th day of February last, one linen shirt, value 3 s. the property of John Gutlin .


419. The said JOHN CLEW was again indicted for stealing on the 10th day of February last, two linen shirts, value 5 s. one neck handkerchief, value 11 d. the property of Thomas Clarke .


I am a pawnbroker; I took in a shirt and neck-handkerchief; the prisoner brought them the 3d of March, he said he was a valet; he has frequently brought things and redeemed them again.

(Shirt produced and deposed to by Mr. Clarke.)


There was a shirt pledged with me; I know nothing of the prisoner, only the description given by my servant answers to the prisoner.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-90

Related Material

420. JOHN ATKINSON and BENJAMIN FURBER were indicted for stealing, on the 16th day of April , five linen table-cloths, value 30 s. one pillow-case, value 2 s. the property of Thomas Harrison .

John Graver saw the prisoner Atkinson drop the linen; and John Webb took the prisoner Furber in company with Atkinson.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-91
VerdictGuilty; Not Guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

421. PETER BUSH and RACHAEL BUSH were indicted for feloniously making, coining, and counterfeiting on the 3d day of April last, one piece of false copper money, called a farthing, against the statute .

(The case opened by the Council for the prosecution.)


I went to Crown-street, St. Giles's ; on Thursday the 12th of this month, I went up two pair of stairs to a front room; the door was locked, and I went in there; there was the man prisoner sitting by the fire in a chair; I made him stand up, and I searched him; I found these four farthings about him, and a pattern farthing, one good, and four counterfeit; and in his pocket was a sixpence; I searched the woman, and found these farthings on her; they were of the same kind; on the chimney-place I found this copper; these two flasks were just by where he sat; his hands were very black; at the fire Mansfield found a pipe with some lead in it; a piece of lead was found on the chimney: here is some chalk and a file.


I am a lodger in the next room to the prisoner, and have been four or five months; my husband lives with me, he is a gilder; I saw the man prisoner put whiting into this wooden thing, and then he fastened it in with a knife, as fast as he could, and after that he squeezed it on each side; I saw him take a farthing and put it in, and squeeze it on both sides; afterwards he shook the farthing out.

Was it wet chalk? - It was dry chalk that I saw; then he melted some lead in a pipe, and he put that in; and when they were done, he field them off, and put them in his hand, and rubbed some blue stuff on them, which gave them the colour of copper; I saw the woman do nothing particular; but I have seen her at times hold a farthing over a candle, and put some tallow to it, that made it look blackish like; I had two farthings and a halfpenny of the money; I had it of my child; I saw the woman prisoner give it my child, who is between nine and ten, to go for a halfpenny worth of snuff.

Are the prisoners man and wife? - Yes, my waistcoat is full of holes, and I peeped through.

How came you to have this curiosity? - They were so very noisy, quarrelling and fighting, I was afraid of fire; she was very careless of the fire; I myself have picked the woman out of the fire twice; she was in liquor.

Prisoner Peter. They used to get drunk together; this is only a piece of spight.

Prisoner Rachael. The woman used to make me get drunk, and pawn my husband's things.


The prisoner lodged at my house since the 28th of December; I looked through Mrs. Null's room, and I saw the prisoner Peter brushing some whiting off a farthing and I saw a file and several implements on the table.

The prisoner Peter called two witnesses to his character.


Fined 1 s. and imprisoned twelve months in Newgate .


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-92
VerdictGuilty; Not Guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

422. THOMAS TAYLOR , THOMAS HARCOURT THOMAS WARLINGS and MARY WARLINGS were indicted for feloniously making, coining, and counterfeiting, on the 6th day of March last, one piece of false copper money, to the likeness of a halfpenny, against the statute.


On Tuesday the 6th of March about four, I went to Taylor's house, No. 13, Peter-street, Clerkenwell ; I knocked at the door; Lavender was with me; as soon as the door was open, I ran in immediately to the stair-head, that leads down to the cellar; the prisoner Taylor was at the bottom of the cellar stairs; the prisoner Harcourt, and Mary Warlings, ran from where the cellar was into the yard, which is even with the cellar; I did not see them in the cellar; but there was no other place for them to come from; I saw them run from the cellar; neither Taylor nor Harcourt had a coat on; they requested to have their coats; Harcourt's coat was in the cellar, and Taylor thought his was there; but says he, it is up stairs in my room; he then went into the cellar; there was a stamping press and a halfpenny die, and a halfpenny between, with the impression upon them; there were candles burning at that time, and the place all darkened round; Lavender asked for a candle to look for some more dies, and the prisoner Taylor behaved very civil and quiet all through, and told every thing indeed, and said, you need not give yourselves any trouble, for there are more dies in the corner; Warlings was up stairs in the parlour; over the cellar where the fly was. found a quantity of halfpence, and some blanks.

(The things produced.)


I went with two other officers to this house in Peter-street, and knocked at the door; it was some time before it was opened; I looked through the window, and saw the prisoner Warlings in the lower room, that goes down two or three steps from the street, with his hand on a table over the cellar, where these stamps were found; Dinmore run past me to the stair-head, and said here they are; I immediately run after, and just saw the glimpse of some persons running into the yard, Taylor was in the space between the yard and the cellar; then I went into the necessary, and brought Harcourt and the woman out; I found these halfpence between the dies that were in the press, and I found five other dies which appeared to be odd ones; we went up stairs afterwards, where Warlings was; we asked him if he knew any thing of the business; he denied it, and said the one pair of stairs was his room; we found these halfpence in the room. (The halfpence produced and deposed to that were found in Taylor's room.) There were thirty shillings worth, which they call a piece.

Could they work this press below stairs, without shaking the parlour? - I should think not; I suppose the press and fly, and all together, do not weigh much less than two hundred and a half.


Look at the halfpence, and the die on the head-side, and the woman-side particularly; are these counterfeits? - They are all counterfeits.

JOHN NICHOLLS , one of the moniers of the mint, sworn.

They are all counterfeits.


I have nothing to say, any farther than that Mary Warlings and Thomas Warlings are innocent of the affair; my brother and me signed our confession before the Magistrate.


Thomas Worlings and Mary Worlings are quite innocent.



Fined 1 s. and imprisoned twelve months in Newgate .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-93
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

423. HANNAH LISSON was indicted for putting off a counterfeit half crown as a good half crown, to one Robert Davis , against the statute .

A second count. For having about her a counterfeit shilling, against the statute.

(The case opened by the counsel for the prosecution.)


I am shopman to a linen-draper; on the 9th of March, about seven, the prisoner came to our shop, and asked for a piece of cloth; I sold her a piece, and she gave me five shillings, and half a crown; I found them all bad, and I asked her if she had no more; then she produced three shillings more; they were also bad; I ran to my master, and I immediately called her back; I called a constable, but before a constable came, she had something in her mouth, and we told her to put it out, which she did; she put five or six shillings out of her mouth, and she said, mind, I do not offer these; the constable found nothing more on her, only a few bad halfpence. (The half crown produced, and the shillings.) These are all bad.

Prisoner. I took them for good; I thought they were good; I went to buy some shirts for my little boy; I cannot swear positively to them.


I have known her fifteen years; I lived next door to her; she had a house full of lodgers, since which she has dealt in Rag Fair.

GUILTY , on both counts.

Fined 1 s. and imprisoned twelve months in Newgate .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-94
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

424. THOMAS EVANS , alias BROWN , was indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Playfair , about the hour of ten in the night, on the 7th of March , and stealing three blankets, value 3 s. a sheet, value 12 d. one wicker basket, value 12 d. his property; a waistcoat, value 1 d. a pair of stockings, value 1 d. and a pair of breeches, value 1 d. the property of Thomas Millar .


On the evening of the 7th of March, between nine and ten at night, my house was robbed, as I was informed; I went out about eight; I left my wife and two others at home; I returned between nine and ten at night; my man came for me; I came home, and found my house robbed

of the things mentioned in the indictment; I know the prisoner from an infant; he was a shoe-maker, and a neighbour; I did not see the things found.


I lost a waistcoat, a pair of breeches, and a pair of stockings; I live at Mr. Play-fair's; I am his servant; I was not at home at the time of the robbery; I came home about twenty minutes before ten; I found the same things were missing.


I received information of the robbery, and a description of the person who was suspected, I went to the prisoner's lodgings, and apprehended him, and in his room I found these things; the prisoner was there in bed; it was two days after the robbery, in the morning about eight; I had a description of the things; seeing these breeches laying by the side of the bed, I asked him whose they were, and he said mine; I saw a pair of stockings, and asked him if they were his; he said yes, they were what he worked in, and a waistcoat that was there, he likewise said was his; nothing but these things were found upon him; but the evening before, I found a basket standing at the end of the court where he lodged.

(The things deposed to by Millar.)

Millar. I am sure they are mine.

What do you know them by from others? - I know them very well, by the mending and appearance of them.

Have you any doubt that they are yours? - No.

Court to Prosecutor. Is your wife here? - No.

Court. There is no evidence of the house being broke open.

Freeman. The prisoner has informed us himself how he got into the house; he wanted to be an evidence, but there being no other person, the Justice thought it was not proper.

What led him to confess? - Nothing, that I know of, because the woman was proved to be in the front shop, and he could not go out any other way with the basket, so he told us how he got out.

What questions were asked him? - None at all; I went and examined the premises, according to his own directions, and I found it according as he said.

What did you say to him when he told you of this? - There was a girl in bed when we took him, and he said he was guilty himself, because we should not hurt the girl.

Guilty of what? - Of breaking into Mr. Playfair's house, and he said it at the office; nothing had passed before; the room was proved to be the girl's room; she paid rent for it; when he was asked what he had to say in his defence, before Justice Walker, he said he had nothing more to say, but that he was guilty, and hoped the Justice would not hurt the girl; and when we came up, there was a lamppost in Mr. Playfair's passage, that leads to Mr. Playfair's house, and he said he got up that lamp-post, got into the yard, and then went into the entry over the back house, where the man lay, where these things were; he brought them down in the yard, and there was the basket; the lock being old, he forced open the door, and got away; he said after he got over the wall, the yard door was open; it was upon the latch; that is the latch of the door of the yard; that was the back house door; it is all adjoining; it is one wall; it is the yard door that goes into the road; but he had got into the yard; the other door was open.

Court. There is no burglary proved now.

Prisoner. I have nothing to say; I have witnesses.

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


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-95
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

425. ANN BROOKS was indicted for feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Elizabeth Coney , about three in the afternoon, on the 2d day of April , the said Elizabeth, and divers other persons being therein, and stealing a pair of women's stays, value 12 s. a striped cotton petticoat, value 8 s. a linen shirt, value 4 s. a shift, value 2 s. four children's shifts, value 3 s. two frocks, value 2 s. two pin-cloths, value 18 d. one child's bordered dimity cloak, value 5 s. one bedgown, value 18 d. one cap, value 12 d. a muslin handkerchief, value 4 s. a pillowcase, value 12 d. a check muslin apron, value 2 s. two check lawn aprons, value 4 s. a pair of pockets, value 12 d. two white linen handkerchiefs, value 4 s. two table-cloths, value 2 s. two pair of muslin robbins, value 12 d. one pair of lawn ruffles, value 2 s. a pair of cotton stockings, value 12 d. three yards of linen cloth, value 12 d. the property of John Leathers .


I live in Drury-lane ; we are lodgers; on the 2d of April this house was robbed, between two and three in the afternoon; I went out at half past two, and returned by four; when I returned, I found the door had been broke open, and the things taken out, I left nobody in my apartment; the people were in the house; I examined the door when I returned; I locked the door when I went out, and tried it; the things I missed were in a box, in the room that was broke open; that is up one pair of stairs; the door up stairs was the only door I fastened; I missed the things mentioned in the indictment.


I produce this bundle; on the 2d day of April I saw the prisoner coming up Wild-street; I followed her, and apprehended her about twenty minutes after three; she had these things loose in her apron; I have had the things in my care ever since; I secured her directly.

(The things deposed by Mrs. Leathers.)

Mrs. Leathers. This gown I know by a piece of callico behind.

What is the value of that? - Five shillings; here is a shirt; I know it; I put a collar to it.

What is the value of that? - Four Shillings.

I suppose you put the lowest value upon all the things? - Yes.


I only assisted to take her into custody.


The prisoner was taken by Beamish first; I took her again.


We took her, and discharged her over night; the property was not produced; we discharged her through humanity, she having a child.


I only took her into custody with Young.

Court to Mrs. Leathers. You are sure all these things were in your box when you went out of your house? - Yes; that was about half past two; I do not know the prisoner.


On the 2d of March I was going up to Westminster, to pay a Mrs. Cordy eight shillings; I deal in Rag Fair, and I met a man I deal with, and bought those things of him; I gave him twenty-five shillings for them; I was going to the fair that very same day.

Court to Beamish. When you stopped her, she had a child with her? - No; she offered me a guinea, besides the property, to let her go; going along in a court by Parker's-lane, where she lives, she called out to some women, and they brought her the child into Parker's-lane, and she took it.

Prisoner. That man said if I would give him a guinea, he would let me go; I have sent for my witnesses to give me a character.


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-96
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

426. JOHN WHEELER was indicted for feloniously assaulting, on the king's highway, Albert Saluagnida de Rotteris , on the 31st of March last, and putting him in corporal fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person, and against his will, one metal mock watch, value 2 s. a metal chain, value 2 s. and a seal, value 6 d. his property.


Mr. GROVES sworn to interpret.

I live in Bedford-street; I have been in town thirty-five days; I was robbed the thirty-first day, in the evening, at very near the hour of eight in Bow-street ; I was alone; I was stopped by two persons who met me; they said nothing.

What did they do to you? - I asked my way; the one said, this way, and the other said, that way.

What happened to you? - After that, they drew my watch out of my pocket; after one had got my watch, he ran away, and the other laughed in my face.

Did you pursue them? - I took the man that stole my watch by the collar.

Did you keep him? - He was too strong for me, and he got away; I cried out stop thief in English.

Was the man taken in consequence of that? - No.

Have you got your watch again? - I have seen it; the constable has it.

Do you know whether the prisoner was one of the two persons? - Upon my conscience, as I speak in the presence of God, I do not know that person.

How came this man to be taken up? - He stood at the corner of the street; I do not know how he came to be taken up.


I was coming home about eight, on the 31st of March, in the evening, and I heard the cry of stop thief in Hart-street; two men ran; one was the prisoner, the other

was a short man; the thick short man was pursued by the patrol; I halted, to let them run by me; presently after, I was told they were taken; there was some little conversation; I said, you had better search the man, or take him away; the prisoner said yes, certainly you are very right, you had better search me, and they took him away; but between the place where he passed me, and the place where he was taken, there I found the watch on the ground; I took up the watch, mud and altogether; I went to Bow-street, and found them there; I left the watch with Mr. Bond.

Court. Were there any other people running in the same manner, in the same place? - None that I saw.

In the place where the watch was found? - None that I saw; I do not know that the watch was dropped by the prisoner; this was about eight at night; I am sure the prisoner is the same man that passed me, and he confessed it; he carried his hand under his coat, which I described, and he said, the reason was because he was lame; as he passed me, his hand was concealed either in his pocket, or under his coat.

Mr. Garrow. Was you at a considerable distance? - I was not.

You have a little mended your recollection since you was before the Justice of peace? - It is not a matter of consequence to me.

Court. But it is a matter of very great consequence to the prisoner, because his life is at stake.

Mr. Garrow. You see I have not provoked you to pertness yet; if it is a long time since, it is not likely you should be more accurate now; you said before the magistrate, that one of them turned up Phoenix-alley, and the other, whom this informant believes to be the prisoner, ran up Hart-street, and passed this informant on the right, with his hand under his pocket; you heard this foreign gentleman examined before the interpreter? - I was not present at the second meeting.

At first you suspected this might be some fun in two idle fellows? - Yes.

In point of fact, was not the prisoner's hand covered with one entire flannel bag? - I believe it was.

Have you any doubt of it? - Now I recollect, I believe it was.

Had not be a very bad hand indeed, three fingers shattered in such a state, as to produce great agony? - Probably it might.

You are a sail-maker? - Yes.

Do you know Alexander Bryson , a thief-taker? - I do not.

Did not you hear the foreigner say no force was used, but that his watch was taken most dexterously and politely? - I heard him say no force was used, but not that his watch was taken most dexterously and politely.

Do you mean now to swear that he was one of the men that run past you? - Yes.

Were there many persons who joined in pursuit? - Only one, which I afterwards found to be the patrol; the men were all strangers to me; the man that went up Phoenix-alley was never taken that I know of.

The foreigner, before the Justice, I believe, gave this account, that he was robbed by one man, who delivered the watch to another? - Yes.

Do you recollect which hand he said? - No.

Court. Was Phoenix-alley between the place where the person passed you, and the spot where this prisoner was taken, or beyond the spot? - When the prisoner had passed me, he had got past Phoenix-alley; he was stopped within some few yards of James-street.


I belong to the government patrols that do duty at the play-house during the plays; at eight at night, going up the passage to Hart-street, all was quiet, and in three minutes I heard the cry of stop thief, towards Bow-street; I saw the prisoner run

past me the contrary side of the street; I run after the prisoner; there were two people turning the corner of James-street, and they stopped him; the foreign gentleman came up and called watch, watch; and pointed to the prisoner; I understood by the foreign gentleman's motions, that he was satisfied that the prisoner was one of the men; the foreign gentleman went to the interpreter; I took the prisoner to Bow-street; he wanted me to let him go.

Mr. Garrow. You understood it as well as you could, as a man that could not speak English? - Yes.

You call yourself, I think, a government patrol? - I am paid by government, and I am the patrol.

Who gave directions for this indictment? - One Townsend was sent with me.

He is a better lawyer than you; he knows how to make out a highway robbery better than you; it was at night, and you tell us, that at eight at night, Hart-street is particularly cool and quiet? - I tell you the street was quiet, more so than I ever saw it.

Perhaps there was no performance at the play house that night? - I told you it was the 31st of the month; I should not have been there, if there had not been a performance.

Do not be angry, keep your temper? - I heard the foreigner examined; I saw the the interpreter; I did not enquire his name, I never saw him before nor since; this Frenchman described a great deal of violence that had been offered to him.

Did he say they knocked him down before they took his watch? - I heard no such discourse.

How did he describe it? - He said he was asking his way to his lodgings, and he had it written down on a card, and he met two men, and one said one way, and the other said the other; and the one snatched the watch out of his pocket; he did not say it was taken so dexterously, that he knew nothing about it till afterwards.

Was it done with great politeness? - I was not taken up much with his evidence.

What state was the hand of the prisoner in when you saw him? - I did not take notice, there was a mob about him.

Was not his hand enclosed in a flannel bag, and three fingers smashed? - That has always been the case; I saw his hand tied up as usual.

Court. did you ever see this prisoner before? - I have often seen him about the play house, and he is one of those that by name and looks, I was told to take care of; I have only been three weeks on that duty; I have known him all the time.

Mr. Garrow. Now, upon your oath, has this man been in custody for any offence of any fort; that is a dangerous question to put to a thief-taker? - Not to my knowledge; I go by my orders.

- GROVES sworn.

I was present when this man was examined in Bow-street; I heard the Frenchman examined; I put the question to him, he said his watch was taken from him with great politeness; and the man smiled in his face, and took his watch, avec grande politesse, et tres legerement; that is with great politeness, and dexterously and slightly; he said likewise, that the man who received it from the other, received it avec la main gouche, with his left hand; he at that time told me over and over again, that he could not say that the prisoner was the man; it appeared to be a common pickpocket transaction, no violence in the least.

You remember they have crammed into this information, that the prisoner was the man, which the foreigner had struck out? - I think it ought to be set right; it was by the mistake of a Dane who could not speak English not French.

(The mock watch produced and deposed to.)


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-97
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

427. MARY DAVIS and JOHN ROSEWELL were indicted for stealing, on the 25th day of February , two live geese, value 10 s. the property of John William Egerton , Esq.

(The case opened by Mr. Schoen.)


Colonel Egerton lives at Ealing , he had three Canada geese; I saw them in the water on the 5th of February; I fed them with three swans; I was out about five in the morning, and when I returned two of them were gone; I know them sufficiently well to identify them; I have no doubt of them at all.


I am daughter to Mr. Grainger, he is a poulterer; on the 26th of February last, on Monday morning, a woman came between seven and eight to our house; that was the prisoner Davis; she asked us to buy some geese; my mother turned round and asked what they were; she said I do not know; my mother asked the price of them; she had the geese with her; she asked a guinea, and said she would take no less; she went out, and came in again, and asked my mother to lend her six-pence; I went out to see which way she went, and there was a man at the public-house door, and I spoke to him.

What man? - I do not know, I never saw him before; she went to the public-house with him; the man came by several times, and laughed and looked, and I saw him at the public-house; the prisoner Rose-well is the man; I saw him at Bow-street, I have no doubt of him; my mother would not buy the geese, they were alive; my father was out, he returned about half after nine, and when he came home he went into Bow-street.


I am a poulterer in Holborn; on my return I traced the people, and I went to Bow-street, and apprehended the prisoners.


I am an officer of Bow-street; on Monday the 26th of February last, I apprehended the prisoner on the information of Mr. Grainger.

(The geese produced and deposed to.)

Court. Have they any mark by which you know them? - When they came out of the North they were put under my care, and I cut some feathers in their tail, as I was sure would never grow any more, and by that I swear to them; I have got the feathers of all the three geese.

Court to Elizabeth Grainger . Are these the geese the woman brought to your house? - Yes.

Court to Graingor. Are these the geese that were brought to your shop? - They are, I have had them ever since.


Gentlemen, I was going towards Smithfield one morning, and I met with Mr. Grainger's son, who goes by the name of Smith; knowing his father for five years back, he gave them me to carry to his father; he gave me three shillings, and when I got there, I was to have a message that he would send him some gold and silver fish, and two pheasants; I carried them, nobody was in the shop, but the woman; she took them and gave me six pence, she said the man was gone to market; I went to the public house and waited, I went to Fleet-market and returned; then there were two gentlemen in the shop, enquiring after ladies' lap-dogs; I had a message to deliver,

and the girl saw me in the street, and she came and told me her father wanted to speak to me; I went into the shop, and was immediately laid hold of; I am one hundred and fifty miles from any person that knows me.


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-98
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

428. THOMAS ROBINSON was indicted for stealing, on the 31st of March last, one cloth great coat, value 5 s. the property of Charles Savory .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-99
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

429. JAMES EVERITT was indicted for stealing, on the 7th of March last, one pair of linen sheets, value 5 s. the property of Thomas Brown .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-100
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

430. WILLIAM BRUCE was indicted for stealing, on the 2d of March , one silver watch, value 30 s. one key, value 1 d. the property of Alexander Taylor .


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-101
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

431. WILLIAM SWANWICK was indicted for stealing, on the 3d of March last, five iron padlocks, value 4 s. fourteen pair of hinges, value 5 s. and two hundred and eighty-eight screws, value 2 s. the property of William Adams .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-102
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

432. ANN DILL was indicted for stealing, on the 24th of January last, one black sattin cloak, trimmed with lace, value 40 s. the property of John Mascheder , privily in his shop .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-103

Related Material

433. THOMAS BAKER was indicted for stealing, on the 16th of April , three ounces weight of tea, called hyson tea, value 1 s. the property of Charles Turner .

The prisoner was seen taking the tea.


Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-104
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

434. JAMES CURFEY was indicted for stealing, on the 20th of March last,

two linen sheets, value 10 s. the property of Susannah Gendre .


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-105
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

435. THOMAS TAYLOR was indicted for stealing, on the 16th day of March , a silver table spoon, value 10 s. the property of William Lashbrooke .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-106
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

436. CHARLES SMITH was indicted for stealing, on the 14th of April , one silver watch, value 2 l. one seal value 1 d. one hook value 1 d. one trinket, value 3 d. one piece of green ribbon, value one halfpenny, the property of John Smith , privily from his person .


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-107
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

437. THOMAS DUBLIN was indicted for stealing, on the 4th of April , one callico shirt, value 10 s. the property of Thomas Spalding .


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron HOTHAM .

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-108
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

438. JOHN WILSON was indicted for burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Bates , on the 18th of March last, with intent his goods and chattles then and there being, burglariously and feloniously to steal .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-109
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

439. DAVID LEWIS was indicted for stealing, on the 20th of March last, one printed book, value 1 s. one wooden measure, called a size-stick, value 1 s. and one cloth cloak, value 6 s. the property of John Green .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-110
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

440. JOSEPH TOMLIN was indicted for stealing, on the 6th of April , one silver milk ewer, value 30 s. the property of Thomas Davis and Henry Davis .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-111
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

441. THOMAS TAYLOR was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John Collier , about the hour of two in the night, on the 30th of August last, and

burglariously stealing therein, three hundred and seventy yards of Irish linen cloth, value 40 l. one hundred and forty-eight yards of muslin dimity, value 14 l. seventysix yards of printed cotton, value 6 l. two hundred linen handkerchiefs, value 15 l. ten cotton handkerchiefs, value 15 s. eight yards of Scotch cambrick, value 3 l. ten yards of printed callico, value 25 s. sixteen yards of long lawn, value 35 s. twenty-five yards of muslin, value 5 l. ten yards of muslin, value 30 s. and one hundred yards of silk ribbon, value 40 s. his property .

The witnesses examined apart at the request of Mr. Knowlys, Prisoner's Counsel.


My husband's name was John Collier , I have had the misfortune of losing my husband since this affair happened; our house was broke open the last day of August.

Do you happen to know of yourself whether the house was secure the night before? - Yes, Sir, I am very sure of it.

Who was the last up in the family? - Mr. Collier; he was not long after me when I went to bed; all was then safe, the doors and windows were shut and fastened; I went to bed at near twelve; I was alarmed in the morning about six; I got up and came down with Mr. Collier into the shop; the door was open before I came down, but the shutters were broke to pieces, and a pane of glass; the screws of the bolts of the shutters had been forced out, and the glass broke; there were goods missed to a large amount, about the value of one hundred and twenty pounds.

I believe you have no knowledge at all of the persons? - No, Sir, I have had the property ever since, which was given me by one of the witnesses.

Mr. Knowlys. It was perfectly light when you got up? - Yes, it had been light some time.

Court. Was there any alarm earlier than six? - No.

JOHN LUCY sworn.

I went to Mr. Collier's after this robbery, and in September I went with Mr. Collier to a house in Brick-lane; on the 11th of September I went to the house of Aldred, on the information that Mr. Collier had received himself; there we found a large quantity of muslin, dimity, some pieces of Irish, some pieces of printed cotton, and a quantity of handkerchiefs, both linen and cotton, I believe.

Who was at Aldred's, when you found these things? - Neither he nor she were at home; they came home soon afterwards, there was nobody at home but the daughter; when they came home we took them into custody; nobody was there during the time, but Aldred, his wife, and daughter. We found a small quantity of linen at the room of Mrs. Bell, on the 19th in the morning; Mrs. Bell is not here.

Did you see the prisoner Taylor at any of these places? - No, I did not; I saw him at a Mr. Goldsmith's; we found a brace of large horse pistols, which were produced here on the former trial, and were delivered into court; Taylor was apprehended on Wednesday the 28th of February, in Golden-lane, at the house of one Mr. Trott.

Was any thing found on Taylor when he was apprehended? - No kind of property whatever; I know nothing further.


On the 11th of September I received information of some goods suspected to be at Mr. Aldred's in Brick-lane; I went there on a search warrant with Mr. Collier; we found some goods there, some pieces of handkerchiefs, and some Irish; they were not at home, when we were searching the

house; they came home afterwards and we apprehended them; I found nothing else, but there was some new cloth at the lodging where I was directed, in Ratcliffe-lai, behind St. Luke's church; there was some new cloth made up in an apron; we went there first, and found out the lodgings, and I found a new apron there, and some cloth; and I said to Mr. Armstrong, we will take Athill across the fields to see if he will say any thing; and going along, he shewed me the very house where I had found the cloth, for he said he bought the goods there.

Whose house was that? - Mrs. Bell lived there, and there were some men's clothes there that hung up; I believe it was Mrs. Bell's lodgings, I cannot positively say; we found her there; there was a coat and breeches hung up, we suspected them to be the prisoner's, but cannot swear they were; the prisoner was not there.

Have you ever seen him there? - No, I have not.

Do you know any thing further till the prisoner was taken up? - No, I advertised the prisoner and another through Athill's directions; I was not at the taking of the prisoner.


Are you the wife of Samuel Aldred? - Yes.

You and your husband were taken into custody on account of some things that were found in your house? - Yes, I bought the things that were found of Athill.

When? - About seven or eight months ago, I cannot six the time nearer than that.

How long was it before they were found? - I believe about four or five days; I bought them of Athill at his house.

Do you know any thing of your own knowledge about them? - I cannot say I do somehow.

Where is your husband? - He is coming, I expect him every minute.


Court. Are you sworn? - Yes.

Court. You know the situation in which you stand before the Court; I therefore advise you to be cautious in your evidence; take care that you tell the whole truth, and that you tell nothing else; if you secret any thing, or are caught tripping in your evidence, you know you have no favour to expect: did you sell any thing to Samuel and Elizabeth Aldred in September last? - To Mrs. Aldred I did.

When? - Some time in last September.

How long before the officers came to apprehend you? - About a week, as near as I can recollect now.

When and how did those things come into your possession? - I believe it was the 6th of September that one Richard Stephens came to my house in the morning; I think it was the 6th of September, I am not sure of it.

I wish you would recollect a little better? - I cannot now; I cannot be positive; it was some time in September, but I cannot recollect the day of the month.

Can you recollect the day of the week? - I think it was on a Friday.

Do not you know the day of the month? - Upon my oath I have forgot the day of the month; to be certain to the day of the month, I cannot recollect now.

It is a little extraordinary you should forget a thing you had so much reason to bear in mind? - I have a great deal of reason to bear it in mind, but it has slipped my memory; I think it was on a Friday morning. I cannot recollect what day in September it was.

How long was it before you sold the things to Aldred? - About a week, as near as I can recollect; and the thing were sold

to Aldred, some days before he was taken up; it was Stevens that came to me in the morning.

Was there any body with Stevens then? - No nobody.

Did you make any appointment with him to meet him any where? - Yes.

Where? - At the cart and horses, in Goswell-street, at Mr. Langdale's.

When? - At seven in the evening, I was to meet him.

Did you meet him there? - Yes.

Was there any body else in his company there? - Yes.

Who? - One Harry Fosset , Tucker and one Thomas Taylor .

What this prisoner? - My Lord, as to his person, I cannot take upon myself to swear he is the same man; there was a man they called Thomas Taylor there; I cannot take upon myself safely to swear that he was the man; upon my oath, I cannot say that he is the man; not positively; when I was before Mr. Blackborrow, he examined me, and I told him, I could not upon my oath take upon myself to swear he was the man.

Did not you know that Thomas Taylor before that evening? - Never, I never had any acquaintance with him, nor ever saw the man to the best of my knowledge.

You mean to swear that? - Yes, to the best of my knowledge.

You seemed before to speak of that man that was called Thomas Taylor , as of a man you knew very well? - I never did to my knowledge; I do not know that I ever saw the man before that evening that I bought the things; the two men, Stephens and Fossett, I knew them very well; I never made any scruple of them.


Do you know Thomas Taylor , the prisoner at the bar? - No, I never saw him but once before in my life, and that was at Mr. Blackborrow's; I never saw him, not to my knowledge; I never did indeed, Sir.

- WEEDON sworn.

I am a milkman; I remember meeting four men, with four bundles, on the last day of August, about thirty-five minutes after three, as nigh as I can guess, but who they were, I cannot tell; I met them in Islington church-yard.

Did you know the persons of any of these men? - I did not.

Should you know the persons of any of them if you should see them again? - I do not think I should; I should not know them.


Have you any knowledge of this matter, further than finding the property? - No, nothing else; under the direction of Athill, I saw the woman where the property was bought, in company with this prisoner, since he has been committed for the fact; nothing further than that.

Why did not you subpoena Mrs. Bell to attend as an evidence? - I never saw her but that time; I knew her very well; I would have done it if I thought I had the least authority in the world; I should have been very proud to have done it; I was not even at the apprehending of this man; I did not know till Lucy sent me word.

Court to Lucy. Why did not you subpoena Mrs. Bell? - I did not know we could do such a thing; she was tried for this fact.

Yes, but she was acquitted? - I applied to that gentleman on the bench; (Mr. Bush, who collected the money for the widow.)


Do you know any thing how those goods that were found in your house came there?

- My wife bought them of Mr. Athill.

Do you know any thing of the prisoner Taylor? - I never saw him in my life before to my knowledge.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this business now stands in such a situation, that whatever may be the truth of the case, there is no evidence at all against the prisoner.


Court to the prisoner. I hope you will take warning, prisoner; your life has escaped in this business, but unless you leave that course of life, which there is great reason to believe you are following, you will not escape the laws of your country long; you may depend upon it your person is too well known; your character is too well known: you may escape punishment for all the offences you have committed; provided you commit none in future; and you may return to the ways of honesty; you have health and strength enough to gain an honest livelihood, if you will do it; you will therefore consider that you have no chance of saving your life for any length of time, if you continue in bad courses.

Shakeshaft. My Lord, at the time of Athill's examination, I was present when all of it was taken; he informed me that Stephens, Fosset, Taylor and Tucker were all concerned; I then said to him, you mean them that use such a house; yes, says he; Taylor and them that were tried for Mr. Reeves's robbery; them are the men; I have likewise seen him in company with Taylor, at a public house; he was sitting at a window, and abusing the officers, and threatening them.

Court. You and all the officers of justice perfectly know Mr. Athill now, as well as Mr. Taylor; therefore I recommend it to you to keep an eye on Mr. Athill; if he is caught tripping, you cannot recommend yourself more to the favour of the Court, than in detecting him in every thing he may commit; if you are vigilant and active, you may at least render it impossible for him to go on with his business. Is there any body besides you, who has seen Athill in company with Taylor.

Harper. I have, at Bill the plaisterer's.

Court to Armstrong. When was it that you saw Athill in company with Taylor? - It was some time last summer; it was before September.

Are you sure of that? - I am positive.

Harper. I cannot positively say to the time I saw him, it was before he was taken up for this robbery.

Townsend. My Lord, I have seen Athill at Bill the plaisterer's, where they all resorted, not in company.

Court. Let Athill be brought into Court, and let him stand committed to take his trial for perjury, in swearing that he never saw Taylor before the evening he bought the things.

Athill. I have said nothing but the real truth, according to my own judgement.

Court. Let him be committed to Newgate.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-112
VerdictsNot Guilty; Not Guilty

Related Material

442. MARY, wife of DANIEL LINNEY , and SARAH GOWAN were indicted for feloniously coining a shilling, against the statute .

There being no evidence to affect the prisoners, they were BOTH ACQUITTED .

They were again indicted for colouring a shilling .


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-113
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

443. JOHN HAYDEN was indicted for forging an order for payment of 14 l. 10 s. with intention to defraud Griffin Ransom , William Morland and Thomas Hamersley .

A second count, for uttering the same, with the like intention.

A third and fourth count, for forging and uttering the same, with intent to defraud William Morland and Thomas Hamersleys.

A fifth and sixth count, for forging and uttering the same, with intent to defraud Ann Lyde , widow .

There being no proof of the capital part of the case, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-114
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

444. JAMES WALCH , otherwise DANIEL WELCH , and MICHAEL FLYN were indicted for stealing, on the 11th day of March last, one silk purse, value 2 s. seven half crowns, value 17 s. 6 d. and 46 l. 14 s. 6 d. in monies numbered; the property of Collin Menzies , privily from his person .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-115
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

445. ELIZABETH HOLLOWAY was indicted for stealing, on the 15th of February last, one yard of muslin, value 3 s. the property of John Gordon .


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

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-116
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

445. ELIZABETH DAVIS was indicted for obtaining ten yards and a quarter of quarter muslin dimity and other things, value 42 s. the property of Buxton Webster , by false pretences .


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

446. The said ELIZABETH DAVIS was again indicted for a like offence.


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-117
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

447. WILLIAM MOLINEUX was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury .


Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

18th April 1787
Reference Numbert17870418-118
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

448. WILLIAM PRIDDLE , ROBERT HOLLOWAY and STEPHEN STEPHENS , were indicted (together with one JOHN SNELLING ) for that they, intending to deprive one George Crossley of his reputation, and without any reasonable or probable cause, to subject him to the penalties by the law provided against persons guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury, on the 18th day of July last, amongst themselves, did unlawfully, falsely, wickedly and maliciously combine, conspire and agree, falsely to charge and accuse the said George Crossley , of having before that time committed wilful and corrupt perjury, and falsely and maliciously to indict him, the said George Crossley , and to cause a certain indictment to be prosecuted against the said George Crossley , upon a charge of wilful and corrupt perjury; and that at the general session of Over and Terminer, held the 19th of July last; they without any reasonable or probable cause, did indict, and cause and procure the said George Crossley to be indicted; for that he, the said George Crossley, on the 3d day of October, in the twenty-first year of the King's reign, did depose and swear before a person in the said indictment mentioned, duly authorized to administer the said oath; that John Snelling , one of the defendants, was justly and truly indebted to him the said George Crossley in 100 l. and upwards, for work and labour, business done, fees, disbursements, and money paid, laid out and expended, by the said George Crossley , for the said John Snelling , and at his request; where as in truth and in fact, the said indictment charged, that the said John Snelling , at the time of making the said affidavit, was not indebted to the said George Crossley in the sum of 100 l. or in any sum of money or cause of action, amounting to 10 l. or in any other sum of money whatsoever; and so the indictment charged that the said George Crossley , in his said affidavit, did commit wilful and corrupt perjury: and this indictment further charges, that the defendants without any reasonable or probable cause, prosecuted the said in part recited indictment, against the said George Crossley , from thence until Saturday, the 25th of November last, when the said George Crossley was in due form of law by a Jury of the country acquitted; and that by means of the procurement and prosecution of the said indictment, so by them the defendants procured and prosecuted against the said George Crossley , he was greatly defamed, disgraced and put to great expence of his monies, to the great damage of the said George Crossley , to the evil example of all others, and against the peace .


Mr. Silvester, Mr. Fielding, and Mr. Garrow.


The Honourable Mr. Erskine, Mr. Chetwood, Mr. Mac Nally , and Mr. Knowlys.

The witnesses all ordered out of Court, and examined separate.

The indictment opened by Mr. Garrow.

The case by Mr. Silvester as follows.

May it please your Lordship and you gentlemen of the Jury, the charge which has been opened to you by my learned friend, against the three prisoners, is for a conspiracy, and a conspiracy of the most wicked nature that be devised by any set of men against another; the characters of the several

defendants are as follows: William Priddle and Robert Holloway , are both attornies; the other defendant, Stephen Stephens, keeps a gin-shop, in the Borough; the defendant John Snelling, who is not now before you, but who is also joined in this indictment, became acquainted with Mr. Crossley in the year 1774, and during the whole period of eight years, from that time to the end of the year 1781, Mr. Crossley was employed in all Snelling's business, as his attorney: In 1778, a woman of the name of Ann Brumidgham, the wife of one James Brumidgham, who then lived with Snelling, was arrested in the Palace Court for a small sum of ten pounds, at the suit of one William Wortley; upon that arrest, Mr. Snelling. applied to Mr. Crossley, desiring him to undertake the defence of that action, she being sued as a single woman; Snelling then told Mr. Crossley, that if once it got wind that they could recover against Mrs. Brumidgham as a single woman, she would be sued for several hundred pounds; and therefore it became a very material point to Mr. Snelling to defend her against this suit. A verdict was obtained by the plaintiff in this action; a writ of error was brought by the defendant, and her coverture assigned for error: she was afterwards and pending the writ of error, arrested upon the judgment recovered against her; upon the hearing of the writ of error, the original judgment against Mrs. Brumidgham was set aside: during the time this action was going on, Snelling came frequently to Mr. Crossley's house, begging and desiring him to take care of the cause, and that he (Snelling) would take care of the money to pay him; this woman at that time, cohabiting with Snelling and going by his name. The first bill in Mrs. Brumidgham's business, was delivered personally to Mr. Snelling, upon the 29th of May, 1779; this bill amounted to 42 l. 15 s. 5 d. and credit is given for 16 l. 5 s. 6 d. leaving a balance of 26 l. 9 s. 11 d. But you will observe, gentlemen, that this bill is not only intitled, Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham , debtors to George Crossley ; but in the credits all the payments, except one, are made by Mr. Snelling; for the 16 l. 5 s. 6 d. credit, is made up of the following items: Received of Mr. Snelling, 3 l. 13 s. 6 d. at Rygate; - of Mrs. Brumidgham, 1 l. 1 s. - in costs, 1 l. 1 s. - of Mr. Snelling, 10 l. 10 s. Gentlemen, I mention these items more particularly in this first bill, because it shews you that Mr. Snelling from this time, knew he was made debtor in Mr. Crossley's books, and he never disputes any payments. On the 9th of August, 1780, a second bill was delivered at Mr. Snelling's house, containing the same items as the first, with further items, amounting to 97 l. 1 s. 4 d. in which credit is given for 46 l. 15 s. 6 d. and leaves a balance of 50 l. 5 s. 10 d. this bill was also intitled the same as the former; Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham , debtors to George Crossley . Shortly after the delivery of this bill, Mrs. Ann Brumidgham called on Mr. Crossley, and requested him to let his clerk make a copy for her without any title, which was done, and this duplicate was signed by Mr. Crossley in the usual way, but differed from the other in nothing more than as it begun Wortley against Brumidgham, instead of Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham , debtors; as did the bill delivered at Mr. Snelling's house: Gentlemen, a third bill was delivered on the 19th of April, 1781; intitled like the former bills, Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham , debtors to George Crossley ; this bill together with the balance of the former, made a sum of 86 l. 0 s. 4 d. and credit is given in this last bill as follows: Received cash, 10 l. by Booth's bill, 12 l. 2 s. my note you have, 15 l. 15 s. leaving a balance of 48 l. 3 s. 4 d. due to Mr. Crossley. I particularly mention the credits at the foot of this bill, because you will remark gentlemen, the last item is,

"my note you have

"15 l. 15 s." and as in the course of the trial it may become material: the transaction, as I am instructed it will appear in evidence, is this, Mr. Snelling being out of town, at the time one of Mrs. Brumidgham's causes came on to be tried, and Mr. Crossley wanted money to carry on the cause; Mrs. Brumidgham proposed his giving this note, payable to Mr. Snelling,

which she engaged to get discounted without Snelling's indorsement: Snelling when he came to town, being to return the note to Mr. Crossley, who was to give a receipt s for money, on account of the cause. Mrs. Brumidgham did bring Mr. Crossley the money for this note, and it was not sent for payment when due. Snelling informed Mr. Crossley he had got the note in his own hands, and would return it; therefore Mr. Crossley in his next bill gave credit for this note. On the 31st of May, 1781, a fourth bill was delivered to Mr. Snelling personally, with the same title as the former, the balance of which amounted to 71 l. 19 s. 10 d. About this time Mr. Snelling got into the hands of Mr. Priddle, and therefore as you may well suppose, no more monies were paid to Mr. Crossley: On the 29th of August, 1781, a fifth and last bill was delivered by Mr. Crossley to Mr. Snelling. This bill was intituled

"Mr. John Snelling on

"behalf of himself and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham ,

"Dr. to George Crossley ," and the balance due 100 l. 4 s. 2 d. Mr. Crossley on the 3d October, 1780, made an affidavit, that Snelling was indebted to him in 100 l. for work and labour, business done, fees and disbursements, money paid, laid out and expended; which affidavit so made in the year 1781, has been made use of as the foundation of all the iniquity of this conspiracy. Gentlemen, in Michaelmas term 1781, Mr. Priddle acting as the attorney of Snelling, suffered judgment to go by default in that cause; and on the 12th of January, 1782, a writ of inquiry of damages was executed in the cause of Crossley against Snelling; the execution of which writ was attended by the defendant Snelling, a clerk to Priddle and counsel on behalf of the defendant, to dispute this bill. The Jury in that case found 100 l. 4 s. 2 d. due from Snelling to Crossley. Gentlemen, at this time Snelling would have paid the money, but was prevented by Mr. Priddle, whose ingenuity suggested a method to escape payment; He applied to the Court of King's Bench, and obtained a rule suggesting Mr. Crossley's bill had not been taxed; and by consent it was referred to Mr. Lowten, instead of the proper officer of the Court, to determine what was due. Before the arbitrator, Mr. Crossley stating that he was employed by Mr. Snelling, but having no written order, the arbitrator awarded against him. Gentlemen, after this award, Mr. Crossley delivered a bill to Mrs. Brumidgham, who on this occasion had it taxed before the proper officer, who found a balance of 75 l. 8 s. 7 d. due to Mr. Crossley: But this bill did not include some articles of business done for Snelling contained in the former bill. Gentlemen, Mr. Crossley heard no more of these proceedings from January 1782, until January 1785; in which intermediate time, very unfortunately for him, he was concerned as attorney against Mr. Priddle in divers suits; in one Priddle had sued a Mr. Bullock, in which action Priddle was nonsuited; in another he was employed to sue Priddle on a bail bond, at the suit of Mr. Plumbe, late Sheriff of Middlesex, and a judgment was obtained in that action; and in the beginning of January, 1785, Priddle proposed to settle and give security. On the 3d of January, 1785, a warrant of attorney was executed by Priddle, and one Robert James , in the penalty of 208 l. at the suit of Mr. Crossley, and witnessed by the defendant Holloway; on which warrant of attorney was a defeazance to pay one half the money in six months, and the other in twelve. Priddle having thus got Mr. Crossley to let him at large, by way of requital, and with a view to get rid of his securities, spirited up his client Snelling to file a bill against Crossley for a malicious arrest in 1785, although the affidavit had been sworn, and arrest made so long ago as October 1781: It never before entered into the mind of man to indict Mr. Crossley, they knew they could not do it; they knew if they did, they must swear falsly; but in 1785, they file a bill for a malicious holding to bail: the cause came on to be tried after Trinlty Term; when it came on, Priddle who never wants ingenuity, put in a number of bills and receipts, supposed

to be the handwriting of Mr. Crossley; Mr. Crossley not prepared for this, it imposed on the Jury, and imposed on the Lord Chief Justice; Lord Mansfield expressed great indignation; why, says he, Crossley must know he had no right to arrest Mr. Snelling; and the indignation of the Court was manifest to every man that heard it; but Mr. Crossley knew they were false, he knew they were forged; he suspected the ingenuity of Mr. Priddle, but he did not think he would carry his ingenuity so far, and therefore could not be prepared with an answer. Gentlemen, in a few days after this transaction, Mr. Holloway made his appearance; Mr. Holloway, the friend, the agent, the bosom companion of Priddle, applies to Crossley, under the mask of friendship; I will, says he, if you will come down, I will get you out of this scrape; I know the whole transaction; why these bills and papers were not forged above a week before the trial; they were made within the week: why, says he, you did not know your own hand-writing, they were so well done: Crossley was alarmed at this; Priddle (says Holloway) had got a witness to prove them; one of his clerks, a good witness on the occasion; and if the occasion had required, would have stood forth to have sworn to this handwriting, though we all knew it was made within the week; but, says Holloway, if you will give me ten guineas, and pay the verdict and costs, I will put a stop to this prosecution; I have a great influence over Priddle; give me ten guineas, and pay the money, I will put an end to the whole transaction. That would not do, Holloway came again in a few days; says he, Priddle wants to go to Worcester assizes, and he says, if you will pay the debt and costs of that action of Snelling's, to be estimated at one hundred guineas; pay fifty guineas now, and the rest by and by, there shall be an end to all this business, and the papers shall be put into the hands of Mr. Lowes, a gentleman at the bar; Mr. Crossley thought they would be safe in that gentleman's hands; he thought they could not be in worse hands than they were; and a meeting was had at the Leaping Bar, the other side of Black-friars-bridge, in July, 1785; Stevens and Snelling were to have been at that meeting, but were not; they therefore adjourned the meeting to Stevens's gin shop: when they came there, Stephens and Snelling were together; Stephens said to Mr. Crossley, this matter shall not be settled for a trifle, we must have 200 l. and nothing less; for if you do settle, now is your time, pay the money now; for if it is not, you shall be indicted for a perjury; and then when you are indicted as an attorney, you will not wish to shew your face in a Court of Justice; it will be an imputation in a Court of Justice, and therefore we shall rise in our demand; an indictment once found, they shall not take less than 500 l. Mr. Crossley resisted this application; but not satisfied with this, Holloway came again, he applied several times to have a meeting at the Mitre Tavern to settle all this matter; that they should have 50 l. and that the papers should be placed in Mr. Lowe's hands: Crossley, who had been frightened into this, and who, as they will tell you, is a timid man; for Holloway had bragged, Oh, he is a timid fool, he will be a fine milch-cow, whenever I want ten guineas; Crossley parted with his fifty guineas to Priddle, and the papers were placed in Mr. Lowe's hands: Gentlemen, this brings me to July 1785; Mr. Priddle then thought his friend Mr. Holloway had served him; why, says he, Mr. Crossley, to be sure, Mr. Holloway deserves ten guineas, and a note was given by Crossley for that sum, Gentlemen, in December, 1785, Mr. Crossley happened to be concerned in defending some informations which Holloway was employed to prosecute; the penalties upon those informations, would have amounted to the sum of 200 l. upon which Crossley's client thought it better to give Holloway ten guineas, than run the risque of being sworn against; Holloway received another ten guineas,and he had the hardliness to go on even with those informations; Crossley resisted them on the part of his client, and they were dismissed with contempt and indignation before the magistrate; what, Sir, (said the magistrate) take the money, and then bring the information! get out of the office. Then it was that Holloway and Priddle set to work, to try what they could do either by way of getting more money out of Mr. Crossley, or ruin him in his business, so as to render him incapable of ever attending to resist them again; they then began by giving notice to Mr. Lowes to return those papers which were placed in his hands; Mr. Lowes applied to Crossley upon the occasion; Crossley said he had no objection, but desired they would take exact copies, before they were entrusted in the hands of Priddle. Gentlemen, from 1781, to 1785, no indictment was preferred, not a single step taken by either Priddle, Holloway, Stephens, or Snelling; though Mr. Snelling must know the transaction from the year 1781, when the affidavit was sworn; and his attorney Priddle must know it when he brought his action for the malicious arrest: Holloway likewise knew it, and Stephens the witness, who said he would not take less than 500 l. not one of them ever thought of preferring the indictment till July session, 1786, and this for an affidavit sworn in the year 1781! Gentlemen, on the back of that indictment, the first witness is Mr. Snelling, the second Mr. Stephens; and as the clincher, comes William Priddle ! in case you two do not swear enough, I will come last and pin the basket; now nobody that hears me disputes Priddle's ability to do that, he is too well known; and therefore puts himself last, to cure all defects that may be found in the former witnesses. But that is not all; you do not know half of Priddle yet; Priddle and Holloway consult together, whether he, Holloway, should be on the back of the bill; no, says Holloway; then I cannot be the go between, I shall look like a friend of his; and unfortunately, though Holloway is cunning, yet he was not wise enough to keep his own council; is for the very day he came down here to find the bill of indictment against Crossley, he met Mr. Sambridge; well, says he, I have been at the Old Bailey, and I have been instructing the witnesses against Mr. Crossley; I do not suppose any thing will come of it; he will come down, but I thought it was better for me not to be on the back of the bill: Holloway boasted of this to Mr. Sambridge, after the indictment was found in July session, 1786: that indictment did not come on to be tried till November, 1786; Mr. Priddle never preparing for it, because, as he was boasting to every body, he did not expect it would be tried at at all; but that he heard and knew Crossley was a timid man; therefore he would settle it. Applications the moment the indictment was found, were made by Snelling, by Priddle, and by Holloway, to Mr. Crossley, to make some terms to settle this business; Snelling represented he was led into it by Holloway and Priddle, and that he knew nothing of the matter himself; therefore excused himself among his friends; Holloway declared that he meant nothing by it, and knew nothing on which to prosecute Mr. Crossley, but that he was a very good milch-cow, and was a sure bank to go to for ten guineas; that Mr. Crossley had money, and while he had six-pence, he would have half of it; Priddle asserted every where, that he was at the expence of the whole of it, and it was his doing, boasting that the false papers and the whole contrivance was his, and that he had given forty guineas out of his own pocket to counsel to prosecute Crossley; Stephens said, he did not mind spending any money at all in a business of this kind; and when Priddle applied to him to be bail for a man; no, says he, we have agreed to indict Crossley, and I will not do any thing for you till you have indicted him. Gentlemen, when Mr. Crossley found they had preferred their bill of indictment, he rejected all compromise; no, says he, I have got into bad hands, I now will getout of them, and will take my trial; I will come before a jury of my country, and let them determine on the justice of my case. Gentlemen, in November last Mr. Crossley's trial came on, Mr. Snelling, Mr. Stephens, Mr. Holloway, and Mr. Priddle, the witnesses attending, were ordered out of court; and here if I was to open to you the different declarations that all these prisoners have made at different times, you would be astonished, not only at their wickedness, but at their folly, for they all of them, at different times, declared their knowledge of the business, and that they knew their accusation to be false, but that they instituted it for their own iniquitous purpose. When the trial came on, the first witness examined was Snelling, the moment that he was examined, it appeared that Ann Brumidgham , the woman that had been sued, had all along cohabited with him as his wife, that he, in Crossley's presence, and every where, had spoke of her as his wife, upon which an acquittal of Mr. Crossley immediately ensued, on that indictment. Gentlemen, one would suppose, that when these men had gone thus far, there was an end to their proceedings against Mr. Crossley, but the measure of their iniquity was not yet full, for in January Sessions, in this year, and pending this present indictment against them, they preferred another indictment against Mr. Crossley, on an affidavit sworn in the same cause in the year 1781, with no less than twenty-nine assignments of perjury; but they dare not face a Court of Judicature with that indictment; for, on Mr. Crossley entering his cause for trial at the sessions where the indictment was found, immediately before the trial, Priddle, (the prosecutor of the indictment) removed it into the Court of King's Bench. - Gentlemen, the employments of Mr. Crossley by Snelling, will not depend on Crossley's evidence alone, but a number of witnesses will tell you, he himself employed Mr. Crossley in Mrs. Brumidgham's suits; and was to pay the expences of those causes. At a conversation, in the year 1780, at the house of Mr. Alexander, a very respectable man, when Crossley was applying to Snelling to drop the suits in the cause of Mrs. Brumidgham, Snelling said, I would rather spend 500 l. than settle this cause, upon which, Mr. Alexander saying, perhaps Mr. Crossley may be uneasy about his expences; Snelling replied, He knows I have undertaken to pay him, and he has taken my security; what is be afraid of? but he is always plaguing me to settle the cause: Gentlemen, by and by you will hear my friend Mr. Erskine enlarge on the expences of these bills of costs: what, 200 l. spent in desending a suit for 10 l.? but you know a man will sooner spend 50 l. than pay 18 d. wrongfully; and it becomes a matter of spirit; I think I do not owe the man the money; I will not pay it, the amount of the sum is nothing, Snelling might at any time have put a stop to it; but he would not, and expressed his anger against Mr. Crossley, for advising him to make it up; and this not only before Mr. Alexander, but a number of indifferent witnesses; since the indictment there was a conversation at Alexander's house, between Snelling, and one Abbot, when Snelling being asked what he wanted by the indictment against Mr. Crossley, he hit upon a very curious method of telling what his motive was; he wetted his singer with the liquor, and wrote upon the table figures of 200, that is it, says he, why, says Abbot, I know Mr. Crossley, very well, it is a great deal of money; upon which he wetted his singers again, and wrote on the table 150, and says publicly, I will take no less; and Snelling said further, he wanted to get some money; for if the money got into Priddle's hands, he should never get it. Gentleman, this was the language of Snelling; and as to Holloway, whereever he meets Sambridge or any man, he boasts continually from time to time, that he would have money out of this poor man's pocket; it was in the year 1780, after the action against Mrs. Brumidgham was brought, and before the bills delivered, that Snelling said he had undertaken to pay the money, and to besecurity to Crossley. Gentlemen, there are a great many other acts which will convince you, that these men have conspired together to charge Mr. Crossley falsely with that indictment; it is a case in which none of them could be deceived, ignorance is not imputed to any one of them, Snelling must know whether he had undertaken or not to pay the costs to Crossley, he must have known the whole of that transaction; and Priddle must have known that the papers he so produced, were false, to save the client that sum of money, because they were his own manufacture; and there could be no excuse for either Priddle or Holloway, to say, that they believed them to be true, when they knew before they were false; and then they did not pretend to say, that there was any ground for the prosecution, because they knew that Crossley would not come before this Court to be tried for perjury; says Holloway, we shall get an end of him as an Attorney; then Priddle you and I shall share his business between us, we shall get those clients that now go to him: But if they were honest men, would not they have thought seriously thus: what! institute a prosecution in July, 1786, for a perjury committed in 1781! and you, Mr. Priddle received fifty pounds; and you Mr. Holloway ten guineas! why point to him? why apply to him to settle the business? but they were conscious they were wrong; they knew it was both foul and false. Gentlemen, it will be said, by my learned friend, Mr. Erskine, that there was some cause for this prosecution of Mr. Crossley's for perjury, because Lord Mansfield had been angry, and called it perjury; I admit it, but Lord Mansfield was imposed upon, and the jury were imposed upon to give that verdict; for had they known the fact, instead of words of indignation falling from that noble Earl against Mr. Crossley, he would have ordered Priddle to have been committed as he richly deserved: then what becomes of the words of Lord Mansfield; and if they believed Mr. Crossley guilty, then certainly they ought instantly to have prosecuted him for the perjury, they ought not to have lain by till July, 1786, before this prosecution was instituted; and when they had instituted it, do they come fairly before the Court? No, Priddle declares, that even in November, in the same year, he had not prepared himself with his briefs, because he could not suppose, that Crossley would be tried; then he purposes to make money of him or a milch cow. Gentlemen, these facts will, I am sure, induce you to pronounce these three defendants guilty of the several parts of this indictment, when I have called the evidence, you will judge of the iniquity of these men. a fouler conspiracy never came before a court. Gentlemen, the defendants know that, and therefore they came here to meet, and, in hopes to baffle, a prosecution of this kind, by the great abilities of my learned friend; my learned friend will endeavour to baffle our witnesses, he will endeavour to hold my client up in bad colours, perhaps, to you; but admitting for a moment, that Mr. Crossley was the worst man that ever existed, which fact I deny; what right had they to conspire against him? they have no right to conspire against a man, and say he has been guilty of every crime under the sun, supposing he had; but it is no excuse in you, to institute a prosecution of this kind, when you know it is false; you are bad men; you are brought to Justice; and you must answer for your own actions, and not for the actions of others; my learned friend, perhaps, will not trouble you with a witness, resting upon a very able speech; and not wishing, that even I, with my poor abilities, should have an opportunity of making any observation, in reply; he will perhaps address you, in a very able speech, calculated to engage your passions; he will say to you, Can you, gentlemen, suppose, that men of this description; that Mr. Priddle, who is a very able man; that Mr. Holloway, who is a very cunning man, should so far forget themselves? but, Gentlemen, I say, it is a very common observation, that the Devil will forsake his friendsat the last; and, in this case, he certainly has forsaken two of his very best friends. Gentlemen, from their own mouths will I judge them; I will prove the facts I have opened, not from vague witnesses, but from repeated conversations held both with Mr. Priddle, Holloway and Stephens, if that fact is so, what becomes of my learned friend's able speech? you will admire his talents; you will say, pity so much ingenuity should be exerted in behalf of men so undeserving; pity it is, that his great abilities are not employed on the other side, to bring these men to justice; if they had, he would have made us all shudder at their iniquity; and we should have sat down, lamenting, that such men ever existed, and that the Court had it not in their power to inflict a more exemplary punishment on such atrocious offenders, than the law at present enables them; for if men of this description can rob another of his reputation, the next step is neither very remote, nor very difficult, namely, to deprive him of his life; and to a man of character, death would be infinitely preferable to the possible consequences of such an accusation, supported by such a conspiracy; for how can a man exit in society, who has been convicted before a jury of his country, of wilful and corrupt perjury, he ought to be, and I hope ever will be an outcast from society. Gentlemen, if the evidence comes up to but half of what I have opened, you will not let the able harangue of my learned and eloquent friend, Mr. Erskine, outweigh the testimony of so many witnesses. Gentlemen, I trust Mr. Crossley's case in your hands, with you I leave his character, which is dearer to him than his life; and I trust that you will, after a serious investigation of the facts, in justice to him, as well as to the offended laws of your country, give these men over to that punishment, which they so richly deserve.


(Examined by Mr. Garrow.)

I am clerk to Mr. Crossley; I have examined a copy of the record of the acquittal of Mr. Crossley with the record, I have examined it both ways; this is the copy, and it is a correct one; I examined it at the office of the clerk of the arraigns.

Did you likewise serve a copy of that notice? - I did.

(The record read.)

Mr. Fielding. Now I purpose to call Mr. Crossley.


At what date was it in point of time that you had the first connection with Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumingham? - With Mr. Snelling either the latter end of the year 1773, or the beginning of the year 1774; there seldom a month passed but I did something for Mr. Snelling; from the year 1774 down to 1778, I did business for him and from his recommendation to the amount of 400 l. or 500 l. from 1774 to 1778.

At what time was it that you was applied to, to undertake any cause for Mr. Brumidgham? - I think it was in Trinity Vacation 1778.

How was it you was applied to? - Mr. Snelling first applied to me at my office; he told me he was going out of town, and that Mrs. Brumidgham, who was the person who lived with him as his wife, though they were not in fact married, but lived with him as his wife, and she had another husband. -

Was this his representation to you? - Yes.

He himself told you that this woman who lived with him, lived with him as his wife, but she was not in fact married to him, but had another husband alive? - Yes, that was his representation; and he said, she was arrested for the sum of ten pounds, but if they recovered that, she was liable for the sum of three or four hundred pounds more, and therefore though this was a trifling sum, he wished me to conduct it in a particular way; he said, I should put it to his account, he should be my pay-master.

Had you at this time seen any thing of Mrs. Brumidgham? - I think I had seen her twice, not on this business, but I had

not known her by any other name than Snelling; Snelling said, I might place it to his account, he should take care to pay whatever might arise.

Did you in consequence of this conversation, undertake the cause for the woman? - Yes Sir, she applied to me two or three days after, when Mr. Snelling was in the country, and gave me the history of the cause, and said, that she had done some friendships for some people of the name of Rayner.

Were those instructions that she gave you, referring to pre-instructions that you had received of Mr. Snelling? - They were; she only related the history.

You did a great deal of business for this lady, under those instructions? - No doubt of it; and Mr. Snelling was with me every day.

Did you in the course of the business you was carrying on, see Snelling only, or at all? - There hardly was any matter of consequence in any Court but he was present; he attended more than persons usually do; I consulted him through the whole business.

To what amount did you do business? - Much larger than 200 l.

Mr. Erskine. Did you deliver any bills? - Yes Sir, five; I delivered the first bill, the 29th of May, 1779.

(That bill produced.)

Mr. Erskine. Here is a bill of the 29th of May, 1779, produced by Mr. Priddle.

(The title read.)

"Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann

"Brumidgham, debtors to George Crossley ." Amount of the whole bill, 42 l. 15 s. 5 d. - the credit is 16 l. 5 s. 6 d. - upon the balance is due to Mr. Crossley, 26 l. 9 s. 11 d.

Crossley. After the trial and the writ of error, in August, 1779; Mrs. Brumidgham was arrested at Warley camp; she kept a sutling house there; after the verdict boil in error was put in, and they took out an action on the judgment; Snelling having become one of her bail in error wards was the attorney) Mr. Snelling me this letter; she was then in custody letter is dated the 7th of August; I think bailed her out on the 9th; this is Snelling's hand-writing:

"Mr. Crossley, Walley

"camp, 7th of August, 1779. I am surprised,

"when I had taken all necessary

"steps, that there should come a warrant

"to take the body in custody, which is

"now taken to Mr. Wright's, at Holloway

"Down; beg you will come there to release. " John Snelling ."

Mr. Fielding. Did you find Mrs. Brumidgham at the place? - Yes.

Did the letter so far as you infer, relate to her? - Certainly.

Was there any other transaction between you, to which that letter could have referred but to that woman? - It referred to her; I found her in custody and bailed her, and signed the bail bond.

Then you did some other business in consequence of this letter from Snelling relative to Mrs. Brumidgham? - I released her.

Did you deliver a second bill? - I did, on the 9th of August, at Mr. Snelling's house, cause a bill to be delivered; and a few days afterwards Mrs. Snelling came to me and begged I would make her a bill without any name; the title is Wortley v. Brumidgham, in the Palace Court; the amount of the bill is, 97 l. 1 s. 4 d. - credits, 46 l. 15 s. 6 d. - balance, 50 l. 5 s. 10 d. - this contains the same items as the first bill, with others; I saw Mr. Snelling frequently about this time; he seldom was out of town more than a week or ten days together; I looked upon him as my client; we were always talking about the business.

Did you, or not, look upon him as the responsible person? - I certainly did.

The bill produced by Mr. Priddle; the title,

"Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann

"Brumidgham, debtors to George Crossley .

"Bill dated 8th of August, 1780; and the

"last article, remains due, 50 l. 5 s. 10 d."

After this, was any satisfaction made to you? - I delivered the third bill in April, 1781; the amount with the former balance, was 86 l. 0 s. 4 d. there is a note of fifteen guineas given credit for in this bill.

Please to read the articles of the credit; Received cash, 10 l. by Booth's bill, 12 l. 2 s. my note you have, 15 l. 15 s. and the last article is, remains due, 48 l. 3 s. 4 d.

Mr. Crossley. When we were at Westminster on the trial, some money was wanting; that note was given, it was to be paid for me; it was a note given by me, payable to Snelling, for the purpose of raising money when he was out of town; it never was paid; I spoke to Snelling about it, and he often promised to return it.

Court. Why was credit given for that note to Snelling? - It was never intended to be sent for payment, we were on a very friendly footing, and the note was long due; I gave the bill for the purpose of raising the money; Mrs. Brumidgham took the bill, and brought the money the next morning, and I had the cash for it, and therefore I gave credit for it.

Was any money settled, or the debt at all liquidated before you delivered another bill? - There were two payments which are at the head of the next bill; which bill was delivered the 31st of May, 1781.

Mr. Priddle. I have not the original bill, but I have the copy of it.

Mr. Crossley. They are both alike, I believe.

Court. Read each of them? - Received 18 l. 8 s. and 10 l. - the title of that bill, is Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham, debtor to George Crossley , 71 l. 19 s. 10 d.

Mr. Crossley. The next is the 29th of August, 1781; that was the last bill; and intitled

"Mr. John Snelling on behalf of himself and Mr. Ann Brumidgham , debtor to George Crossley ." The balance of that is 100 l. 4 s. 2 d there is no credit upon that; the business got into the hands of Mr. Priddle, and he never paid any thing after.

Then that is the last balance previous to your making the affidavit of the debt? - Yes.

Mr. Fielding. After all these bills delivered to Mr. Snelling, did you see any thing of him after the delivery, till the time you was driven to have recourse to law? - I frequently saw him after the delivery of the second, and a month or two after the delivery of the last but one; Mr. Priddle and Mr. Snelling came to my house; they said, they came to treat with me about the papers; and Priddle said, if I would give Mr. Snelling a time, which he then mentioned, for payment, and delivered up the papers without the money, it should be paid shortly.

Mr. Fielding. I ask you upon your oath? - That was the first time I had a personal interview with Mr. Priddle upon that business; I told Mr. Priddle that I would not part with the papers without the money that was due to me; they were the papers in the cause of Wortley and Brumidgham.

Did you happen at that time to mention any thing of your determination to proceed at law against them? - Not at that time, for I wished to get the money without if I could.

Had you at any time pressed Snelling, or threatened him with a legal progress? - I never threatened him with any process till he came into the hands of Priddle; I had no cause of complaint before; I told him I would not part with the papers till I was paid; I think they went away, and said, they would give me an answer; or something to that effect.

How long intervened before you saw either Priddle or Snelling again? did any thing pass material between you? - No Sir, I cannot say that there did; I do not know that I saw Mr. Snelling after the delivery of the last bill at all.

Have you heard from Snelling at any time, whether he had or had not in his custody any money of Mrs. Brumidgham's? - Yes Sir, 400 l. frequently, when I advised him to settle the cause, he said, what was that to me, he had more money in his hands of her's than would pay me; he was

my pay-master; I arrested him at the instance of Mrs. Brumidgham.

Had Mr. Snelling at any time before, manifested any thing like dissatisfaction at the urgency of payment? - He said, that other attornies would go through their business before they asked for money; I told him, they might, but I would not in such litigious suits; that might be at the delivery of the last bill but one.

At any of these times when you had these conversations with Mr. Snelling, did he attempt to shift his ground? - Never, he always acknowledged that he was responsible.

How long elapsed after these conversations, before you was driven to take out legal process against him? - The first time that any dispute arose, was his wanting me to get possession of a house in Surry.

After this dispute, what time might elapse before you was driven to have recourse to legal process? - After the delivery of the last bill, and the month expired, I sued out a bailable process.

Mr. Fielding. From this bailable process it was that the perjury was assigned; after this arrest did you see any thing of him? - Not to my knowledge.

Mr. Fielding. How long did you hold him in custody, till he was bailed? - A little time; I do not know when he was bailed.

When was you first apprised of an indictment for perjury against you on this affidavit? - To the best of my remembrance, it was preferred in July sessions, 1786.

Mr. Fielding. Your Lordship sees at once the gap there is!

Court. Yes, there are five years.

Mr. Fielding. Now in these five years, had any thing been said to you by these present defendants, and what was said to them? - I had several actions against Mr. Priddle in that intermediate time, upon two of which there were executions.

Mr. Fielding. Did Priddle stand indebted to you in any sum, and what? - He stood indebted to Mr. Plumbe, the late Sheriff, or to Mr. Saunders, the Sheriff's officer, in 100 l. knew it by Mr. Priddle's admission.

Mr. Fielding. Did he ultimately in the event, become indebted to you in a particular sum? - Yes, in that way, he was not indebted to me till I took the secu after that settlement, he frequently applied for time; the sum he admitted he owed me was 104 l.

Did any conversation pass, respecting the subject of the indictment, between you and any of the defendants? - After the action for the malicious arrest, there was nothing before that; an action for a malicious arrest was brought against me; I think it was in Hilary Term 1785, or Easter.

Who was the attorney in that? - Mr. Priddle.

Who was the plaintiff? - Snelling.

Had Mr. Priddle acknowledged to you before this time, that he was your debtor to the amount you mentioned? - Yes, Sir, he had given me security before that.

Were there any terms proffered to you at all by Mr. Priddle, during the pendency of this cause? - No Sir, I forced them on as quick as possible by rules to trial.

After this trial ended, I believe there was a verdict against you? - There was.

What were the damages? - Sixty pounds.

After this was ended, what conversation did you at any time hold with Priddle or Mr. Holloway? - Some few days after the trial, I met Mr. Holloway; he told me, if I would give him ten guineas and pay the verdict and costs, he would get me out of the scrape.

What scrape did he say? - I told him, I did not understand him; I was much afraid of speaking to him at that time, though I had done some friendships for him; he said, about the papers; I had certainly been overseen at the trial, and had admitted papers that I had never wrote; that I had been taken by surprise. I was sure I never could write such papers; and he said, I was a fool, and did not know my own handwriting; they had not been made seven

days before the trial, and Mr. Gosnel was to prove them.

Who is Mr. Gosnel? - He was then Mr. Priddle's agent, or something of that kind; I told Holloway I believed I was got into bad hands, and I should have no objection to get out of them; that I should not mind ten guineas, and as to the verdict, I did not want to trouble myself about that; I should pay it without any further trouble; he said he would apply to Mr. Priddle, and get it settled in some way or other under his management, and I must give him ten guineas, for himself; there were several meetings between us; at one he pretended Priddle was going to Worcester assizes, and that was the time to strike, and that he could make a very good job of it; if I would give Priddle fifty guineas to enable him to go down there, and set fifty guineas off the warrant of attorney, that should be a discharge of that verdict; the damages and costs were to be estimated at one hundred guineas: we had several meetings. Then he told me that Priddle wanted to fly off, but that he had agreed with Mrs. Priddle that it should be settled; that she had the entire government of Mr. Priddle, and that she was very fond of venison, and that they must have a venison feast at the Horns, in Surry; Holloway and I went there, we had a neck of venison; Mr. and Mrs. Priddle were to have been there by his appointment, but they never came; Holloway came there, and while we were there, he continued to work upon my passions; said, that it must be settled at any rate, even if it was to the amount of two hundred pounds, to prevent Priddle bringing forward an indictment for perjury; I told him I would not pay more than the verdict; Holloway said, I ought to settle it, if it cost two hundred pounds: Priddle would furnish evidence to convict.

When was the first time Mr. Holloway mentioned any thing about an indictment for perjury? - He said he would settle all then; he intimated to me that there was a danger of an indictment for perjury; that was about the time of the ten guineas, to induce me to it, I believe all in one conversation. He said I ought to settle it, if it cost me two hundred pounds more, for Priddle was determined to furnish evidence to convict.

Be accurate, if your memory will serve you, as to the terms made use of; do you feel yourself warranted upon the oath you have taken to say, that these were the terms, that Priddle would furnish evidence? - Clearly; I found myself in a very awkward situation; I wanted to come away, upon which he changed sides, and said, if I doubted his integrity, he would make affidavit of the forged papers; he said he would compel Priddle to settle it; when Holloway went away, he said he would apply to Priddle again; he then wrote an appointment to meet me at Mr. Lowes's; there was a previous conversation between Holloway and me about putting the papers into Mr. Lowes's hands; they were the papers, as I understood it, that were produced in Court. A meeting was appointed at the Leaping Bar, on the Surry side of Westminster-bridge, by Holloway, and Mr. Lowes went over there with me; Mr. and Mrs. Priddle, and Mr. Holloway met there. Priddle upon that meeting said, that the verdict should be settled upon the terms of paying fifty guineas down, and there was fifty guineas in the term preceding to be wrote off the warrant of attorney, and I was to postpone the judgment on the warrant of attorney, till final judgment could be obtained on the record; I understood the agreement fully concluded then; but Priddle said he would have his client present, that he might have a discharge. Mr. Snelling did not come, and we went from there, Mr. and Mrs. Priddle, Mr. Lowes, and me; Holloway left us, I think; we went from thence to Stephens's house in the Borough, to look for Snelling, and there we staid for a few minutes; they came in both together; Holloway never came to Stephens's house; but Stephens and Snelling came in after we had been there some time: Priddle withdrew with Snelling; Stephens said, if it was his case, it should

not be settled for two hundred pounds; that was while they were absent; I am not sure whether it was before they returned or not; but after they returned, Stephens said in the presence of Priddle and Snelling, it should not be settled for two hundred pounds; and if there was a bill of indictment found, he would be d - d if it was settled under five hundred pounds; I said to Mr. Lowes, it was unfit for me to be there; and Mr. Lowes and me came away together: either a day or two after, or the next day, I received an appointment that Priddle was determined to settle the business; I believe I have a letter from Mr. Holloway; it is in his hand-writing; it is dated the 9th of July, 1785.

Court. It is of no consequence, he has told us already? - Afterwards there was an appointment, I rather suppose it must be verbal, with Holloway, to meet Priddle and him at the Mitre Tavern in Fleet-street; that was for the 11th of July; we met there on the 11th of July, at the Mitre Tavern, Holloway and Priddle, Mr. Lowes and me; Holloway went to fetch Mr. Lowes; while he was gone, I asked Priddle to let me look at the papers; he then shewed me the original bills of costs, and papers which corresponded with the affidavit that Lord Mansfield had reprobated; I said to Priddle, those are not the papers that were produced in Court; he said, d - n you, you do not know your own handwriting; I did not want but to settle the business, I knew very well that those papers being deposited in safe hands, would be the same thing to me; Mr. Lowes came in, I gave him the fifty guineas, and Priddle delivered him the papers; Mr. Lowes went back, and said Priddle with him; they came back, and said the papers were locked up; I then told Mr. Lowes he must pay Priddle the fifty guineas, and a receipt was given; Priddle then said, you must give Holloway the ten guineas; I was not provided, I gave a note to Priddle, and the note came for payment by Mrs. Priddle; this was the 11th of July, 1785: in the Michaelmas Term following, Priddle was to have entered satisfaction on the judgment on the verdict; there was no writing for it; he asked me in Michaelmas Term to let him have ten guineas, and then he would enter up the judgment and satisfaction; I gave him the ten guineas, and took a receipt in the cause. In Trinity Term, 1786, I heard he had applied to tax costs; I then took out a rule to be present, but he taxed them ex parte, and issued out execution for the whole money.

Did they levy the whole? - I did not see the execution, but the officers came to my house, my clerks denied me, I cannot tell what was marked; I saw Priddle afterwards.

Did Priddle admit that he had taken out execution? - He said he had not taken out execution, as I understood; I told him that was false, for that the officers had been at my house, and I was not at home.

Did he admit that he had done it? - No.

Did any conversation take place in any after-time, relative to the indictment for perjury, and to any method of accommodation? - I do not recollect that, I do not know that I ever saw Stephens after the time he said he would have 500 l. I think Priddle said whether I had paid a part of the execution on Snelling's judgment or not; I should pay it over again, and he would have all his securities up, or he would prefer an indictment for perjury; that was in Trinity Term, 1786; I went away directly; I do not recollect seeing Priddle again.

Did you see Holloway again? - I do not recollect.

Did you see any thing of Stephens? - I do not recollect.

You saw Holloway at your trial? - Certainly; Mr. Priddle, Mr. Stephens, and Mr. Snelling were witnesses on the back of the bill; we had Holloway turned out of Court; he said he was a witness on the trial.

Mr. Erskine. If I understand you right, you was acquainted with Snelling from 1773, or 1774? - Yes.

You have had various transactions with him? - Yes.

During all which time, I understand you to say, you never found him defective in his payments; and you had no reason to distrust his credit? - Not till after the delivery of the bill of 1781.

Then it was Mr. Snelling that first applied to you upon Mrs. Brumidgham's distress? - He first applied to me to employ me on her behalf.

And that he was to be your paymaster? - Yes.

This happened before you had seen Mrs. Brumidgham on that business? - Yes.

Consequently you undertook the business on Snelling's credit soleley? - I should have taken up any business on his credit.

Then I take it for granted, you never received any sums of money from Mrs. Brumidgham on that account? - I have received sums frequently from both.

Did you give any receipt at that time? - I have no doubt but I did.

The credits, I observe, are marked on the bill? - I never had any dispute about the credit.

You brought an action against Mr. Marsh, did you not, for Mr. Snelling? - Yes.

You applied to the Court of King's Bench, in order that you might retain the debt and costs in your hands, because Snelling was indebted to you on account of Mrs. Brumidgham's business? - I believe I did.

On that occasion, Mr. Snelling came forward, and denied, that he had employed you? - I do not know that he did, the rule was discharged, because I had not sworn that Mr. Snelling was not able to pay me, the Court said they never interposed, unless it was an insolvent man.

Afterwards you brought an action against Mr. Snelling, charging him with all the sees, all the disbursements, and all the business done for Mrs. Brumidgham? - Yes, In that matter I had a judgment by default, and recovered the money before a jury, the master said he had a great many references before him; and it went to Mr. Lowton, with a general reference.

Did you attend Mr. Lowton on that reference? - Yes.

Did you produce before Mr. Lowton the different bills which had been talked of tonight, the five different bills? - No doubt on it, and I believe they were left in Mr. Lowton's hands for some time.

Take that paper in your hand, and answer me, Sir upon your oath, whether that first bill, at the time it was left in Lowton's custody, was intitled, as it is now, Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham? - For any thing I know to the contrary, it was as it is now.

Will you swear positively? I have an affidavit in my hand, which was the affidavit you made in order to get the debt and costs in the action of Snelling against Marsh, in which you swore you always gave credit to Mr. Snelling, and not to Mrs. Brumidgham? - I say now, that I never did deliver any bill of any kind without being entitled, Mr. John Snelling and Mrs. Ann Brumidgham , Drs. and I tell you now, Sir, that the second bill you produced, they have a duplicate of it, with a like title, that is in my hand writing.

Then I understand you to swear, that you never did make out the bill of the 29th of May, 1779, there was but one bill of that date? - It is impossible to say, at the distance of eight or nine years; we were upon terms of the greatest friendship; but, I positively say, Sir, that the bills were all delivered in that fashion.

You have stated, that the first bill was delivered on the 29th of May, 1779, and that it was in your own hand writing; was that first bill, of the 29th of May, 1779, produced to Mr. Lowton? - It is impossible to recollect at this distance, if not by them, it was by me.

In that bill of the 29th of May, was not Mrs. Brumidgham alone, made debtor, and not Mr. Snelling? - She certainly was not.

Then you say, that the very first bill you

ever delivered, which was the 29th of May, 1779, which bill was laid before Mr. Lowton, the arbitrator, was titled as it is now? - I mean to say, that the first bill, dated the 29th of May, 1779, was titled as you mentioned certainly.

Was there any more bills of that date delivered? - Not that I know of, my copy might be laid before the arbitrator.

Mrs. Brumidgham alone was not made debtor? - She could not.

Did you ever make out a bill in your life that had Mrs. Brumidgham alone debtor? - Not to my remembrance; I wish to be understood to say, I never did to my remembrance, it is impossible for me, at the distance of eight or nine years, to swear to transactions.

You surprise me, I understood you to say, that the first bill of the 29th of May, 1779, was titled as it is now; did you make Mrs. Brumidgham your debtor, or, did you make Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham your debtors? - I certainly made Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham jointly.

Were there produced before the arbitrator any sums of money received of Mrs. Brumidgham? - I do not recollect; there was no dispute before the arbitrator, as to the sums at the foot of the bills.

But were there not receipts produced to shew? - I should rather suppose, that the credits were taken from the foot of the bills.

Did you ever receive in point of fact, 10 l. - 10 l. - 12 l. and 10 l. from Mrs. Brumidgham? - I may, for ought I know, whatever I received is at the foot of the bills.

Did you give receipts, as receipts from her, on account of Snelling, or on account of herself? - It is impossible for me, at this distance of time, to recollect what receipts I gave, but I should rather suppose I gave them in his name; I believe there were duplicates of the bills, and there were books, those books are in my custody now

Are they in court? - After I came down here I had notice.

Court. That is no notice at all?

Priddle. It was in the morning; I had his notice only in the morning.

Did you in all your accounts before the arbitrator charge Mr. Snelling as well as Mrs. Brumidgham? - I certainly did.

Then how came the arbitrator to decide there was nothing due to you? - He found nothing due to me.

Did he make it in writing? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. Then I object to talking of it?

There was then an action brought against you by Mr. Snelling for having maliciously held him to bail? - There was.

That affidavit that I just now put into your hands, was read in Court? - It was.

In which you swore, that you had made no bill, except in the name of Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham? - No doubt of it.

How came you to say on your original examination, that there was a forged account of your's produced with the name of Mrs. Brumidgham only? - I did not say so; Holloway told me after the trial was over, that there was; I saw them in Court; I saw the names signed to them, and I believe I admitted them; the papers were put in the usual manner.

Did not you hear it stated that your affidavit was false in that respect? - I do not recollect that any thing was stated about the affidavit.

Was you not in Court at the time the verdict went against you? - I certainly was.

Holloway told you after the verdict, some of the papers had not been made above a week before the trial? - Yes.

How came it you never made any application to the Court for a new trial? - Because I had agreed not to impeach the verdict at all; I found myself in bad hands.

You knew very well if there was a difference, you had an opportunity of detecting it? - The papers were not in my hands at that time.

The papers must be different to those that were produced before Mr. Lowton? - They must be different, because I certainly at

the arbitration, would have impeached any false papers.

Did you in Court, when the cause was tried before Lord Mansfield; (I was counsel against you.) when I stated in your hearing, that you declared that all your bills were made jointly; did you deny that I had your bill made only to Mrs. Brumidgham? - I certainly did not see that there were any forgeries at that time; I certainly admitted the papers, suspecting them to be mine.

Did not you hear me state in the publick Court, that in the first bill, Mrs. Brumidgham was alone made debtor? - I do not recollect it.

Do not you know the cause was determined upon that point? - I do, but I do not recollect your opening that bill; I was very much surprised when those papers came to be read, because I was sure I never wrote such papers; I might be instructing my Counsel.

Look at this? - This is my writing; the minute at the bottom is not mine.

Look at that? - That is my hand; they are all my writing; they are my receipts; I should presume they were written at the time they bear date; I either received that sum from Mr. Snelling, or somebody on his account.

Were those receipts before Mr. Lowton? - I do not know; I do not recollect any thing being before Mr. Lowton, but the bills of costs, and the credit that was given at the foot, when a cause of Mrs. Brumidgham's upon a plea of coverture, came on to be tried at the King's Bench; the evening before, I wanted some money, this note was delivered over the table after dinner to Mrs. Brumidgham, knowing Snelling to be out of town, and she got the money.

Mr. Garrow. She told you that the only way was to give a note to Snelling, and she would get cash for it? - No bill could be produced before Mr. Lowton so directed, with my hand-writing fairly obtained.

With respect to your bills, they could not be with a single title, or Mrs. Brumidgham only debtor, if they were fairly obtained from you? - Certainly not.

With respect to your books, they were of this sort; the bill was copied out and became a perfect duplicate, therefore if the books were produced to Mr. Lowton, they could be only copies of the bills? - Certainly.

Mr. Holloway. If ever I was thoroughly shocked in my life, I am this night; you say you saw me after this verdict at Guildhall? - Yes, in the Strand; I came to your house some few days after; you had made an appointment; I first saw you a very few days after the verdict, it might be the next morning.

Upon your oath, you did not come to me in Scotland yard? - I did not first; I came to you by your own appointment; you said, if I would give you ten guineas, you would get me out of the scrape.

Did not you come to me after my Lord Mansfield declared in my hearing, that you had committed the most wicked impudent perjury he ever remembered; did not you come to me, knowing I knew Priddle, and feeling your situation? - I never did apply to Mr. Holloway till I met him in the Strand, and had this conversation with him.

You never did apply to him till he made you that offer? - No, Sir.

Mr. Holloway. Did not you write to me on the 11th of July? - I might for ought I know; I do not know that I did; if you have any letter of mine you may produce it; you told me if I would be directed by you, you would get me out of the scrape, and you would speak to Mr. Priddle.

You say you was frequently with me afterwards? - Yes.

What were those meetings for? - For the purpose of settling upon terms you proposed.

Settle what? - If you would have my ideas upon the subject, I believe it was to work out of me as much money as you could get.

You have told the Court that I told you the papers were forged? - You certainly did say some of the papers had not been made a week before the trial, and that I did not know my own hand.

Was it not your own request that I would interceed for you? - After the first proposal, I certainly did wish to get it settled.

I ask you, if I ever mentioned any sum of money that you were to give by way of setling any indictment? - You mentioned that I must settle it, if I gave him 200 l. at the Horns, and Priddle would furnish evidence to convict, if I did not.


I am a farmer, I live in Wales.

Are you acquainted with Mr. Stephens and Mr. Priddle? - I have seen them together, I remember seeing them in October, 1785; I saw them at Mr. Stephens's house.

Who were present at the meeting? - I saw Mr. Stephens and Mr. Priddle, it was on a Sunday; Mr. Priddle asked me to walk with him to the King's Bench, and from there to Stephens's; and we went to Stephens's, and when we got there, Mr. Stephens said, d - n you Priddle, I find you are going to do us all; I did not know what he meant by it; however the conversation past, what do you mean? and Stephens said, those costs of Crossley's should be paid some time ago; I am informed you have got them; he said he had not; says Mr. Priddle to Mr. Stephens, Mr. Stephens, we want you about an elegit of Grant's; says he, I will not give bail for Grant, I will have no concern unless you get the money of Crossley; you have got the money of Crossley, it was agreed upon to indict him, you see we have done him once, and we can do him again; says Priddle, I only want you to step forwards for this poor man that is in gaol, and to get him out; no, says Stephens, I will not, you know I agreed to furnish the money, if you will indict the man, we can get a thousand pounds of him; you know we have done him once, and we can do him again; then Priddle and I came away; says I to Priddle, that Gentleman Stephens is a money-getting man; says Priddle, O I can do him; as we were going on, says Priddle, do you know that Crossley has got an execution against me, for a hundred pounds; when I have settled with Crossly for this money, I then shall indict Crossley, and I shall then get two or three hundred pounds out of him, and get the execution, and then they may all go and be deman'd.

Did any more conversation pass at that time? - No; I think about the 5th of December, in the same year, my son was with Priddle, and he sent him over to see if Stephens would bail Grant, I went with my son to Stephens, we staid there a couple of hours, I suppose, before Stephens came in; when he came in, my son related the matter to him; no, says he, I will not bail Grant, or have any thing to do with him, till the matter is settled with Crossley; says he, I am a Boroughnian, and have a sack full of money; and you may tell him, unless he will do that, I will not stir a foot; my son went out, and I talked to Mr. Stephens about the business of bailing Grant, and he still said the same thing.

Did you see Mr. Priddle at any time in June, 1786? - Yes, I was with him, I think it was June, or the latter end of May, 1786; Mr. Priddle asked me if I had any money in my pocket; I said I believed I had; he had some of me, I was to have it the next day; says he, I shall have money enough to-morrow, I can give it you again; I went down the next morning, Priddle was at Westminster; says he, will you take a walk with us, we are going over the water; I went with them, Priddle left us, and Snelling and me, and his clerk, went to them, and somebody else, I cannot recollect who; we staid some time, and Mr. Priddle came; then we returned back; Priddle said to me, Mappleback, you have been over to Grant's, and here is a little bit of an affidavit, which you must swear to; when I went to ask Mr. Priddle for the money, says he, d - n me, he has taken out a writ of error; then Holloway came; says he, what do you think Bob? Crossley has taken out a writ of error; oh! says Mr. Holloway, d - n him, we will do

him over; we shall get 1000 l. we will indict him.

Where was this conversation? - At Westminster Hall, just by the gave; says Holloway, you know I was a witnesses to an agreement, and Crossley was to pay the money, and he has been a good milch cow, and I have got ten or twenty out of him, and said, he would get a hundred; Mr. Priddle was Snelling's attorney in Trinity Term, 1786; I think there was some conversation in Place-yard; says I to Pridle, you have brought me into a very pretty mess, here is a non pross for 27 l. and Snelling has got a receipt for the costs; oh! d - n you, says Priddle you are not up to it; I was obliged to give him a receipt for the costs (meaning Snelling) to indict Crossley, for he would not be concerned in the business, unless I give him a receipt for that sum.

Did he tell you when that prosecution was to be carried on? - He said, they would do it immediately, as soon as Priddle had got the money of Crossley; for some costs of a writ of error; or something of that sort; he said, we shall indict: Crossley; I only gave him a receipt on purpose that we should indict Crossley; in August 1786, I came to London about the 17th or 18th; I saw Priddle; so I applied to him to know who I was to pay some money to; says he, you shall not pay it, do you know we have indicted Crossley; no, says I; says he, the bill is found, and now d - n him, we will do him up; says he, do not you pay the money, Crossley and me will make an end of it; he has got money enough; Snelling said, he would have no concern in the indictment; Snelling said, you know you are to go through this business of the indictment against Crossley; but says he, Priddle, you know my friend Stephens is to find the money, and I have nothing to do with it; Priddle said, I think, I shall receive five hundred pounds.

Did he mention at any time any money that either he or any body else had paid towards carrying on the prosecution against Crossley? - No, I was a perfect stranger at that time to Crossley, but I met him by accident, and he subpoened me to attend at the sessions; I went to Priddle, and told him I had got a subpoena; O d - n him, says he, we will do them up, I will have three or four hundred of him; says he, when you was here before, I did not think of going on with the business; I had not then made out a brief; but now I have one of three hundred sheets; if he does not come down immediately; I have given fifteen guineas to Counsel, and I will give twenty more.

That was before Crossley's trial and acquittal? - Oh dear! yes; I told them to settle it; then says Priddle, if you will go and bring me my execution and 300 l. that matter shall all be ended, and I will give a receipt for the money; I then said, it is a sum of money; but however, if Crossley is a man of money, in the hands he is in, he had better give it, than stand the racket, and I will advise him and give him all my trouble; I told Crossley; I then told Priddle, that Mr. Crossley said, he would be d - ned if he gave him a shilling; then says Priddle, I will pursue him immediately, and I will knock him all to pieces; for if he gets quit of this business, I will indict him, and indict him again, till I do him over; I was with Priddle several times; he then said, he would take 200 l. and I went and begged of Mr. Crossley, to give 200 l. says I, I advise you to give 200 l. and make it up; I told Mr. Priddle that he would not give any thing; now says I, you are like to fight it out; it was some time before the trial; I think it was in October sessions; I never saw Mr. Holloway, but at Guildhall; and says he, this will be the ruin of Crossley; says I, I am sorry for it.

I believe Mr. Priddle's son married your daughter? - Yes; I have no connection with Mr. Crossley; Mr. Morgan, of Bedford-square, is my attorney.

Mr. Knowlys. Can you recollect when it was that you first saw Mr. Crossley to know him? - I cannot tell you, but long ago; in 1781 or 1782; on a Sunday.

Have you seen him often from 1781 or

1782? - Yes, but never to drink, or have conversation with him; I knew him by person.

You knew him perfectly well in the year 1783? - I knew him when I saw him.

How long have you been a farmer in Wales? - About seven years; my farm is at Cefnyberrin, in Montgomery; I lived in Yorkshire at that time; I have lived in Wales at times, about six years; my own farm is at Ealey, in Yorkshire; I let it last April, and left it.

What farm have you now? - I live at Cefnyberren, when I am at home with my daughter.

How long have you occupied that farm? - I have had it six years in my hands; I let it for three years, and only entered on it last April.

Is this farm your own? - I look upon it as such, when I have paid for it; I bought it, and when I find the right owner, I am ready and willing to pay for it; I have not paid for it yet; I have had the farm in Yorkshire fifteen or sixteen years; I have occupied my own farm since last April; that has been the place of my last residence.

How long have you been in town now? - About six or seven days; I have lived at Mr. Crossley's sometime; I lodged there; I feed at his table, but I never had any money of him for my trouble in coming up; I never staid an hour at Mr. Crossley's house, but on this business; in November, I was at Mr. Crossley's house; it was all on this business.

Then you came to town on this business, and lived for a month in his house? - I always was at his house; I never did any business for him; I never served a writ for him in my life; I have been constantly living in the country; I cannot say what term it was in.

Have you ever served a writ for Mr. Crossley? - No, never in my life.

Did you never, at the suit of Jacques, serve writs for Crossley? - What do you mean, writs to arrest men; I never did; I believe I did serve a copy of a writ; I went with Crossley's man.

Did not you make an affidavit of the service of that writ, after you had served it? - I believe I might, I did not remember it; I remember nothing about it; I might not make an affidavit.

Did you or did you not? - I gave the gentleman the writ.

Did you swear to that service? - Yes, I believe I might.

Did you, yes or no? - I believe I might.

Did you ever say you would do for Priddle? - I did not.

Have you never said so to any person whatever? - Never in my life, he has said a thousand times that he would send me to gaol; and I said, if you do, I will send you there.

Do you know one John Hall? - Very well.

Do you know Robert Jemmet? - But a little.

Do you know Isaac Gillet ? - Yes, I have done business for him.

Did you, to any of those persons, say, that you would hang Mr. Priddle? - No, never to my knowledge.

Will you swear positively, that you never did say so; I will bring a hundred people to prove you did? Gillett may have heard me say so to Priddle; and then he may say it.

Did you never serve any commissioners of bankrupt or any body else with notice or with writs in Jacques's-cause? - I cannot tell about that; I was at Mr. Crossley's house about business? - He might ask me.

How many times have you done this? - Perhaps once.

Not twenty times? - Nor ten, nor five; I will be hanged if I did; I cannot remember how many times; I believe I might make an affidavit of it perhaps once or twice, I cannot tell.

Mr. Holloway. Where was it you saw me? - At Westminster-hall, in the gate in the forenoon.

How long ago? - I think it was sometime in July last; I will not be sure.

Your son is now clerk to Mr. Crossley?

Mr. Garrow. I think you said, that a judgment of Non pross led you to Mr. Priddle? - Yes, it was.

All your knowledge of elegits, was in consequence of that? - Yes.

Your son was once clerk to Mr. Priddle? Yes, but I was very sorry for it.

This trial of Crossley's was put off several times? - It was so.

Mr. Crossley entertained you with the best he had? - Yes.

Was not Mr. Snowdon your Attorney? - Mr. Clark, by the directions of Mr. Priddle; I never employed Snowden in the business; it was a scheme between Priddle and Clark to touch me for the money.

In short, Sir, you are at law with Mr. Priddle? - Yes.

Have you not, at this moment, by your own direction, given to your attorney, a suit in the court of Exchequer, against Mr. Priddle? - Several, he wanted to rob me of a large sum of money, or my friends, and I would not let him.

Did not you hold Snelling to special bail? - I suppose I held him to special bail, it was by Mr. Priddle's directions.

Mr. Garrow. There was no alternative but to be robbed by Mr. Priddle, or to go to law with him? - Yes.

So all your connection with Clark was produced by Priddle? - He told me he could not be an attorney for me, but he would be a witness.


I keep Tom's Coffee house, in Cornhill.

Did you see Mr. Snelling and Crossley at your house, any time in the year 1780? - They may have been there; I have dined with Mr. Snelling at Mr. Crossley's; I think it was in 1780, to the best of my recollection at this time.

Do you recollect any conversation between them? - I heard a conversation after dinner; Crossley mentioned to Mr. Snelling that he was engaged for him in defending a cause, and there was an application made by the opposite attorney to settle it, for Wortley; and Snelling seemed angry, and said, he always wanted to settle the causes, upon which he said, he would not do it, he would rather spend 500 l. than settle it; I thought it then was a matter of dispute, whether Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham were married, or how they lived together; I said, perhaps Mr. Crossley may be uneasy about his expences; and Snelling said to him, no, you are not, are you? I am to be your paymaster; I believe it was in 1780, or 1781; I cannot charge my recollection just now, Mr. Crossley said, you had better settle the cause, in order to save expences, and you will get this money; I think it was an offer of 40 l. Snelling said he would not settle it, he would rather spend from 100 l. to 500 l. At another time, near the Christmas following; Snelling was very frequently there; Crossley asked him about a note of 15 l. or fifteen guineas that he had lent Mrs. Brumidgham, during the absence of Snelling, to get money to pay the expences with, he said, that note is never come for payment; and you may give a receipt for it now, and I will take care of it.

You are very well acquainted with Crossley? - Yes, I am; I know nothing more of Snelling than seeing him in company several times.

You do not know then, that Mr. Snelling swore in the Court of King's Bench, that he never had employed Mr. Crossley? No, Sir, there was an appointment between Mr. Abbot and Mr. Snelling at my house; I went to bed, and left them there; they were both drunk, they came to settle something; Snelling would have 150 l. he wetted his fingers with the wine, and figured 200 l. They said it was a great deal of money; I believe Mr. Jacques was there; Snelling said, he wanted to get some money, for if the money got into Priddle's hands, he should never get it; after he figured 200 l. he then figured 150 l. then he said no less.


Do you remember seeing Mr. Holloway any time in the year 1768? - I believe it was very early in the January, 1786, there was a business in which Mr. Holloway and me were jointly concerned at that time, and a sum of money had been received by Mr. Holloway, I conceived, on the joint account, on which we were engaged: Mr. Holloway declared, he did not receive it on that account, but that he received it from Crossley, for the purpose of smothering an indictment which was in agitation against Crossley for perjury; that he had received the like sum at the Mitre Tavern, in Fleet-street, when Priddle received 50 l. that Crossley was a frightened driveling fool, and he would make him bleed at any time; that whenever he chose to alarm Crossley, as he did once about some venison; he was very sure he would let him have the same sum. Holloway frequently mentioned him in the course of business, that he should not oppose him in an action we were concerned in, for, that an indictment for perjury should always be held in terrorem, against him; I do mean so upon my oath; I have very frequently seen Crossley; but did not know him, only as being concerned for some Lottery-Office keepers; shortly after this he ridiculed Crossley, said he was a driveling fool, he might have settled it for a hundred, tho' it should cost him many hundreds; tho' damn it he and Priddle had made up their minds; he should not be a witness upon the bill, because he might have the opportunity to act as a mediator, if it was found necessary, as he had been before at the Horns at Kennington; for all they wanted, was to get security for a sum of money. Subsequent to the second indictment, Mr. Holloway and me had several disputes, which are now settled; he then told me he had been at the whole expence of the second indictment for perjury against Crossley, even to bringing up Priddle by Habeas Corpus, for Priddle chose to have him tried at the Old Bailey; since that, Holloway has said, that Priddle and Stephens were nothing to him, they had used him very ill; and damn them, he would give them up, if I would intercede with Crossley not to prosecute him; subsequent to that, Mr. Holloway has, by intreaties first, then, by saying it was necessary we should make an affidavit, not to appear against each other, and he endeavoured to dissuade me; that Mr. Erskine was to appear, and he would blow me out of Court. With respect to Priddle, I believe, in Trinity Term last, there was a motion; I spoke to Priddle; I told him I thought it was a great way off, he said, I do not care a pin for the event of this motion; I will indict him for perjury in Snelling's cause; I will make him give up all my securities, and a round sum into the bargain; I never saw Stephens to my knowledge, all kinds of differences are settled between me and Holloway, nor any animosity.

Mr. Erskine. Why you and Mr. Holloway were very good friends? - Yes.

How long ago is it since you went into partnership with Mr. Crossley? - I never was in partnership with Mr. Crossley; all is made up between me and Holloway, and general releases, my mind has given him a general release; I am upon my oath; it was an agreement between Mr. Holloway and me, that the profits should be divided; it is not so with Crossley, his are merely agency fees, he is literally my agent.

When was this conversation with Priddle? - I believe it was in Trinity Term last.

What time in the term? - I really do not know; it was a promiscuous meeting; I was standing upon the steps when he was coming down.

Had you any conversation with him before or since? - Never, I knew Mr. Priddle personally; I did not mention it from friendship to Mr. Crossley.

Was it sheer justice? - It was sheer good nature; I was sorry to see such a scene as they were engaged in at that time; I had no connection with Crossley; I was very intimate with Holloway.

Mr. Holloway. Did not you send to me to come to your house at ten last night? - No, Sir, I did not, I do not recollect I had any business in the world to send for you.

You did not send your coachman, or some of your servants for me last night? - I do not recollect that I sent for you at all last night?

Court. A circumstance of that kind could not very easily have escaped your memory? - I meant to have sent for him on Sunday, I knew there was a writ out against one Coppin, at his suit; I wanted to get Mr. Holloway's consent to discharge it; it was either Sunday night, or last night, but whichever it was, it was for that purpose; and no other.

Have not I very frequently declared to you, that I knew nothing at all of this business, that I was not on the back of the bill? - Yes, you have, since this indictment; but I have as frequently remonstrated with you.

When you and I made up our differences, did you not then treat about my interfering with Priddle, and the people that you thought were concerned in the prosecution against Crossley?

Upon my oath, as I stand here, you desired me to mention to Crossley, that you would give up Priddle and Stephens; for damn them, what were they to you; and you have repeatedly said, you was to give Mr. Erskine twenty guineas, and they were to pay Mr. Mingay.

THOMAS LOWES , Esq; sworn.

I am a Barrister at law.

Have you been occasionally employed in business for Mr. Priddle? - I have.

Do you remember any meeting on the Surry side of Blackfriars-bridge, at which you was present? - I do.

Was that after a trial, Snelling against Crossley? - It was.

Do you recollect the date of that meeting? - I do not.

Do you recollect who were present at that meeting? - Mr. Priddle, Mrs. Priddle, Mr. Holloway, and Mr. Crossley; I was desired to attend that meeting by Priddle, in order to settle some matter between him and Crossley; there was some matter which they had settled, and some papers which had been lodged with me, which I was to keep till they called for them from me; Mr. Priddle was not there when I arrived; he came in soon after, he said then that he did not chuse to do any thing, but in the presence of his client, which I understood to be Snelling; his client, I understood from him, then was in the Borough, at a Mr. Stephens's; and it was then agreed to go from thence to the Borough, where Snelling was said to be, for us all to go there; but Mr. Holloway did not go; Mr. Priddle, his lady, and Crossley, and me, went there; when we arrived at Stephens's, neither Stephens nor Snelling were there; we staid sometime; and then they both came in; upon that, Mr. Priddle retired with Stephens and Snelling to a different room; after a few minutes Mr. Priddle came into the room where we were; and said, Mr. Snelling and Stephens were coming; they did so, and it was said by some of the company, I do not know by whom, whether Snelling was agreeable to what had been proposed; Mr. Snelling appeared rather to be in liquor, he gave some answer, but in such a way that I could not understand him, upon which, Mr. Stephens immediately said, it should not be settled, unless Crossley would pay a sum of money, and if he did not, he should be prosecuted, upon which, Mr. Crossley asked what he meant by a sum of money, the reply of Stephens was, that 100 l. or 200 l. should be paid, or he should be prosecuted; and Stephens said, he would find money for the prosecution; upon that, Mr. Crossley desired to know what was to pay; he paid, and he and I went away together without replying to that answer of Stephens's; Mr. Crossley said, if that was the case, it was not worth his while staying, and called for the reckoning, and paid it, it was sometime after that,

I do not know her long, there was a meeting at the Mitre Tavern, in Fleet-street; I was not there; Mr. Priddle or Mr. Holloway came to my chambers, and told me, that Mr. Crossley was at the Mitre Tavern, if I would have the goodness to go there; matters between them would probably be settled; I went there in consequence of that desire, with the person that came for me, there was Mr. Priddle, Mr. Holloway and Mr. Crossley; as soon as I came into the room, after the common compliments, Mr. Priddle and Mr. Crossley retired to a window to look over some papers, then they were put into a sort of loose cover, then it was said to me, that Mr. Crossley would pay 50 l. or guineas; I believe it was guineas, upon these papers being lodged with me; upon which, Mr. Priddle immediately went with me to my own Chambers, and delivered the papers, which they looked at, and which I have never seen; and I opened a drawer in my library table, and put the papers in, and locked the drawer again, then we returned back to the tavern, where Crossley paid Priddle fifty guineas; I believe there was, at the same time, a note given to Mr. Holloway, by Mr. Crossley, as I took it for fifteen pounds; I did not know the consideration of it; I do not recollect any thing more that is material passing at that meeting; I staid but in very short time; these papers continued in my possession for many months; at last Mr. Priddle demanded them of me; I told him I could not deliver them without the consent of Mr. Crossley, if he brought his consent to me, I would, with great pleasure, give them up; some time afterwards Priddle applied to me again, I told him I could not do it unless Mr. Crossley would consent to it; he then said he should be obliged to apply to the Court of King's Bench; I called on Crossley, and told him what passed between Priddle and me; Crossley seemed rather uneasy, and he said, let them be delivered to any other gentleman at the Bar; I communicated that to Priddle; Priddle agreed to that, and named a gentleman at the bar; I think the gentleman's name is School; I did not know the gentleman at the time; before I had delivered them to Mr. School, Mr. Priddle applied to me again, and told me the papers must be delivered to him, upon that, I mentioned it again to Mr. Crossley, upon which, Mr. Crossley immediately said, I do not care what becomes of them; you may deliver them to Priddle if you please.

Did Crossley desire you, or did you yourself take any particular precaution about them? - I had not till then looked into the papers, and then I gave them to my stationer, and had a copy made of them.

Did you examine that copy by the original? - I did.

Did you make any mark on that copy, to certify its authenticity, and during the whole time you had those papers in your possession, had Mr. Crossley them any one moment out of your possession? - He had not.

Did he make any alteration in them the whole time? - No, Sir.

Did you, or did you not, permit any body else to make any alteration? - Not a soul living.

Could any body make any without your observation? - No, no alteration could be made in them while in my possession by any means whatever.

The copies, were correct copies of the originals as they were delivered to you, had Crossley ever seen them during the whole time they were in your possession? - Never, nor no one person whatever; nor had I ever seen them myself; I delivered the originals after they were copied, into Mr. Priddle's own hands, in Westminster Hall, at the bottom of the steps, going to the King's Bench; I desired Priddle to look them over and see if they were all there; he opened them, looked them over, and said, they were all right.

Did Priddle at that time know that you had taken copies of them? - I do not believe

that he did, nor do I know that he knows it at this moment.

Be so good as to look at these papers, and tell me whether these are your marks upon them, and whether these are the correct copies you took? - These are the copies.

Have you since this indictment, or since the indictment against Crossley for perjury, had any conversation with Holloway about the business? - Since this indictment, I believe it was upon the very sessions week that this indictment was preferred; and after it was found, I was attending the Sessions at Clerkenwell-green; as I came out of the Sessions, Mr. Holloway was at the door; he spoke to me; he then, said, that Crossley had preferred a bill against him, and it was found; and says he, since that, he has been making proposals, which were rejected by the parties; he said, had Mr. Priddle been advised by him, Mr. Crossley would certainly have been found guilty on the former indictment, for perjury; but says he, he is so fond of bills; we are preparing bills now, and he shall have enough of them; I believe that was the whole conversation; I left Holloway on the steps.

I believe you was desired by Mr. Crossley to attend on the trial for perjury? - I was, and I was subpoened at the same time, on the part of the former prosecution, and at the same time, I had notice delivered to me, saying, that I had not delivered the receipts back which were delivered to me.

Upon your oath was that true at all? - It was not true, it was grosly false, and it was desiring me to prepare myself to give reasons why I suffered the bill to be altered, that was a gross calumny, and a falshood.

Mr. Holloway. In the part originally that I took in the business of Crossley, was not it purely out of friendship to Crossley; was not that your idea of the business? - I understood you to be a mutual friend between the parties.

About the former bill, did not I say, that as to the former bill, it was preferred against Crossley; I knew nothing about that bill; it was about what my Lord Mansfield said about the affidavit that I spoke, and when all the witnesses were ordered out of Court upon the trial of that cause of Crossley's, you was present, whether I did not declare on being ordered out of Court, I knew nothing about this business of Crossley's; I can give no evidence about it? - I do not recollect any thing of that sort passing in Court; I know I was ordered out, at the particular request of Mr. Priddle, who subpoened me upon the prosecution; if that passed, it was after I went out.

Mr. Erskine. I take it for granted, that at this time when these papers were deposited, and this money was to be paid by Mr. Crossley, it was subsequent to the action for the malicious arrest; there was a verdict at that time against him for sixty pounds? - There was.

And you understood the costs must follow? - Yes.

You heard him promise to pay the remainder in November? - I heard no such promise.

Was there any demand made on Crossley, more than the costs in these causes? - Not to my knowledge; I never heard it from Priddle, about a round sum of money, but from Stephens.

Mr. Holloway. Previous to this indictment, have not you heard me declare my with, that the matter should not go on? - You wished that no such prosecution had been had.

Court. I remember myself, your telling the Court that you was not a witness.

Mr. Garrow. I recollect it perfectly.

Mr. Erskine. May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury. I have been not a little surprised, at a great deal that I have heard in the course of this trial; and although I feel (and if I did not, I must be deprived of all sense and feeling) that there has been a considerable degree of evidence given against those who sent me to defend them; yet I address myself to you, at this late hour of he night not at all disconcerted, because I have the best

opinion of your understandings and disposition to do justice. Indeed, if I could conceive you capable of being led away by the prejudices which must arise from hearing one side till the other is heard, and if I could conceive the consequences of such prejudices would be, that you would not attend to me when I stand up, I should not be able to do that duty I came here with a very strong inclination to do: but Gentlemen, when I come to state to you what I have to lay before you, and what I have been witness to, in the course of my profession in other Courts, in this very transaction; I am persuaded that honest indignation that may arise at first in the breasts of a Jury, and which some of you must have felt, if you have at all conceived, that what these witnesses have sworn is truth, that indignation will turn the other way; and when you have heard my case, then it will be accompanied with a degree of commiseration for the defendants for whom I am counsel. Gentlemen, let us first see what you have to-try, what the question is for your determination; I will not misrepresent that question, I will state it, applying to the learned Judge who is to try this cause, with that integrity, and that intelligence, which so much distinguish him in the administration of justice; and if there be any one observation that I make on the subject of this prosecution, that does not meet with his Lordship's full and complete consent, I give you liberty to lay aside every thing that I shall say, and that you will apply yourselves only to the correction which I shall receive from his Lordship on that account. Gentlemen, the defendants are indicted, for having maliciously, and without any reasonable or probable cause, falsly, wickedly, and maliciously conspired together, to indict Mr. Crossley for the crime of perjury. Mr. Crossley is an attorney of very considerable practice, but that shews you he knew better; this perjury was said to be committed in an affidavit made by him, when he swore in October 1781, that John Snelling was indebted to him in an hundred pounds and upwards; they are charged with having conspired to prosecute Mr. Crossley upon this affidavit, not only maliciously, but without any reasonable or probable cause; or in other words, that they knowing and believing Mr. Crossley was innocent of that perjury, having no reasonable or probable cause to believe he was guilty, but believing his innocence, of their mere malice and wickedness, conspired together to indict him for this diabolical crime. Gentlemen, if they had reason to believe that Mr. Crossley was guilty, his situation in life would render that guilt the more abominable; and if the defendants afterwards believing him to be guilty, and having reasonable or probable cause to suspect that he was guilty, they did proceed against him, hoping that he, Mr. Crossley, knowing his guilt, to save his honour and character, would come to some terms of compromise, however you might be offended with persons for compounding publick justice, and under that colour attempting to extort money; if you think that the defendants, believing Mr. Crossley was guilty, although they ought to have taken a different course, and instead of giving up the prosecution, that they should in an open honest manner, have instantly brought him forwards to a publick trial, but instead of that, they omitted it, they compounded it, and for money they let him off from the punishment, although it is not a proceeding that ought to be justified; if this were proved to the full extent on the prisoners, although it is not a thing that I can at all call for your approbation upon, or desire your sanction to, yet it is quite another species of crime to that charged in this indictment; because these defendants are not indicted for having compounded the crime, or for extorting a sum of money to compound it, but that believing a man to be innocent, they maliciously prosecuted him as a guilty person, though they knew him to be innocent: the question is, whether on the evidence, (not merely on the evidence you have heard, for there is a great deal thatwill be contradicted) the question that you will have ultimately to try, will be this, whether you have any reason to think, that Priddle, or Holloway, or Stephens, or all of them together, did prefer this bill of indictment against Mr. Crossley, charging him with a perjury, and that they, or either of them, or any of them, such as you can fix by the evidence, had any reason to believe, that he was actually guilty of that offence: if they knew perfectly well that Snelling had given this undertaking, or that Snelling did make that promise to pay, which has been given in proof. - If you should be further of opinion, that all the other defendants knew it, and that therefore Mr. Crossley's affidavit was true, then I admit they are without all manner of defence. But on the other hand, if you should think Mr. Crossley to be perfectly innocent, he can never be tried for that crime again, and it never could be called into question but by his own indictment for a conspiracy; but if men are not content with an acquittal, it is impossible to prevent their being brought again into Court; if he is guilty, and the defendants can prove that guilt in this cause, it cannot be a malicious prosecution; but supposing him to be innocent, if he was not innocent with their knowledge, but that they proceeded upon reasonable and probable causes, then my Lord will tell you this to be the law, that if you should be of opinion that these people had a reasonable belief, that Mr. Crossley had taken a false oath, and that they intended not to proceed against him by indictment, but that in the hopes of extorting a sum of money, though there is no colour for that upon the evidence; but admitting even that the defendants intended to prosecute this Mr. Crossley, or to frighten and terrify him with this prosecution to get money of him, then believing he was guilty, but willing to give up the prosecution of that guilt for a sum of money, which he was well able to pay, it has no manner of connection with the crime you are trying, which is indicting him of an offence which they in their consciences believed him to be innocent of. Now I will lay before you not only some observations on the evidence that has been given, but state to you the evidence I am about to produce: Mr. Snelling most unquestionably had connections with this woman Mrs. Brumidgham, they were intimate, they were very much connected, and for any thing I know, she might sometimes pass under his name; and for ought I know, something of that sort may appear on the trial; Mr. Crossley says to-night, he was applied to originally by Mr. Snelling, that he told him in the most explicit terms, that he was to be pay master, that he knew him in 1774, and in a period of six years, never had any reason to find fault with him, or to doubt his payments, till he became acquainted with Priddle; but there has not been a conversation to night of any payment on the part of Mrs. Brumidgham; none of them have introduced Mrs. Brumidgham, but it is understood and stated by Mr. Crossley himself, that Mrs. Brumidgham, living under Mr. Snelling's protection, he promised to pay him for his labour; and now Mr. Crossley tells you, on his oath, that he was employed by Snelling, and not by Mrs. Brumidgham: after this cause he delivers in a bill on the 29th of May, 1779, and I shall prove by Mrs. Brumidgham, that the bill was not delivered to Mr. Snelling, that it was delivered to her, that it was made out, Mrs. Brumidgham debtor to Mr. Crossley, and not Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham, debtors. Now can any body believe that he should not know his own debtor, and should in the very first instance make out a bill, not Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham, but Mrs. Brumidgham? he never thought then of charging Mr. Snelling as his pay master, he never thought Mr. Snelling his debtor, all this never occurred to Mr. Crossley at that time; but his bill, which now lays before me, but which has been altered and written on an crazure, this identical bill was delivered first of all with a different title, Mrs. Brumidgham debtor to GeorgeCrossley, and the name of Snelling never made it's appearance upon it; from the proofs I have to lay before you, you will have little doubt on the subject. This was in May 1779. In Trinity Term, 1781, Snelling had employed this very Crossley to bring an action against a Mr. Marsh; and in order to get the debt and costs out of the hands of the defendant's attorney, he made an affidavit in the Court of King's Bench, in 1781, in which he positively swore, that he had delivered that bill to Mr. Snelling, on that occasion, Mr. Priddle was Snelling's attorney, and Snelling came forward, and positively denied that he ever gave any instructions to Mr. Crossley, that he ever employed him, that he ever retained him, or that any one single circumstance, which Crossley has mentioned now, is true; in consequence of that Mr. Crossley's rule was discharged: When Crossley found himself thus foiled, he brought an action (and this is the part I must particularly beg your attention to) he brought an action against Snelling, Snelling could not be examined himself, he was there defendant; then he brought his action (as you have heard from Mr. Crossley himself); that cause was referred, there was a judgment by default, it was afterwards made the subject of a general reference to Mr. Lowton; and Mr. Crossley tells you to-night, that he attended Mr. Lowton, who had a general reference, in order that the account might be taken, and it might be seen whether Snelling was indebted to Mr. Crossley or not; Mr. Crossley has been examined to-night, and he has produced his bills, and he says, that every one of the bills which he delivered, he delivered copies of to Mr. Lowton, (though he boggled at it at first), he said certainly, in every bill Mrs. Brumidgham was made jointly debtor with Snelling, and not alone: Now if Snelling was his employer, if he undertook and promised to pay him, why join Mrs. Brumidgham? On the other hand, if he knew that he had no other demand on Snelling, he had no manner to make out the bill, but to charge Mrs. Brumidgham to be debtor: Mr. Lowton after examining the accounts, after seeing his bills, declared that there was nothing due at all to him: and compelled him to pay the costs of that reference; now upon what grounds did, or could Mr. Lowton determine there was nothing due from Snelling to Mr. Crossley? if Mr. Crossley had produced the receipts I shall produce presently in evidence, Mr. Lowton will tell you he should have made a different award; if it appeared by all his books, by all his conduct, that his dealings had been with Mr. Snelling, and not with Mrs. Brumidgham; but when he saw this man had made Mrs. Brumidgham debtor and not Mr. Snelling, Mr. Lowton had no sort of difficulty in making an award in favour of Snelling against Mr. Crossley, and to make Mr. Crossley pay the costs of that reference; you will observe we are here examining all this as antecedent to this bill of indictment for perjury, which did not arise for several years afterwards; and you will see how, in consequence of this award in favour of Snelling, he brought an action against Mr. Crossley for arresting him, and holding him to bail on that very affidavit, which is the subject of this indictment; for in order to arrest him, he made this very affidavit, which is the subject of the trial to night: that action came on to be tried before my Lord Mansfield, and he told the Jury, (as I am persuaded the Recorder will tell you,) that it requires the very same evidences to obtain a verdict against a defendant in an action, for maliciously holding him to bail, and that the question is not whether by mistake, a less sum is due, but whether the affidavit is made maliciously? I have heard Lord Mansfield say, the very same evidence that is necessary to convict a man of perjury, is necessary to establish that action. Now you will attend to the observation I am about to make; when Snelling brought this action against Crossley, the question was, whether Mr. Crossley's affidavit, upon which he did hold Snelling to bail, was a true or false affidavit, and within the knowledge of Mr. Crossley who made it?and if the Jury and Judge who tried that cause had not been convinced that that was a false affidavit, they consequently would have given a verdict for him; I was Counsel for the plaintiff, and we produced in Court the affidavit which I have just now stated to you, made by Mr. Crossley in Trinity Term, 1781, in which he positively swore, that he had delivered them four bills; for the question was, to whom he had given credit; to whom he had originally given credit was to be determined by the first bill: you are to carry in your minds what was the first bill; that was the same of this date; I produced the affidavit, which was, that he delivered four bills, and each of those bills was intitused Snelling and Brumidgham; he swore that he delivered that bill to Snelling, and that Snelling was made the debtor; Mrs. Brumidgham will tell you, that it was originally made to her; and you will see what is now written, was written on an erazure; the affidavit being read, Snelling produced a bill the 29th of May, 1779; Mrs. Brumidgham, debtor to George Crossley , openly in Court; I will call witnesses who were present; I could prove it myself, it is written upon the back of my brief, in the very words in which it was produced; but it does not require any evidence, if in putting in the bill it appears to be what it was; if the bill was made out in the name of Mrs. Brumidgham, the evidence of the bill would not have corresponded with the affidavit; whereas the verdict was immediately taken, because the bill delivered in 1779, when compared with the affidavit, the instant my Lord Mansfield saw there was that variance, he told the Jury, the question you are to try is, whether Mr. Crossley has wilfully and falsely made the affidavit necessary, that Snelling was indebted to him in the sum of one hundred pounds. You see on the face of his bill it appears, that he did make Mrs. Brumidgham debtor, and therefore the plaintiff is intitled to a verdict. Now, Gentlemen give me leave to call your attention to a circumstance that strikes me to be very material indeed; Mr. Crossley was in Court at that time, he appeared to be in good health that day; he says he is ill now, and takes out his smelling bottle frequently; but he was sitting in Court when I opened the plaintiff's cause, and he said he never delivered any bill to Mrs. Brumidgham, for that I have under his own hand, and I will prove his bill. If he knew that he had given credit to Snelling and not to her; if he was conscious, as he must have been, that no such bill could have been produced; his conduct would have been, let me see this bill, let me look at it; now can any body suppose Mr. Crossley has so little sense, that when he felt himself oppressed, when Lord Mansfield declared it was the most wicked perjury he ever heard; if he knew that no such bill could be produced, that he would not instantly have called for the bill itself? But he did not; and why he did not, no reason can be assigned; but however, to-night I will put in the bill, and you gentlemen will be the Judges of it. Gentlemen, I doubt not but you will give me credit, when I assure you, that I have no connections or acquaintance with the defendants at all; God forbid I should. I come here from a sense of duty; and I assort that having opened the case in the hearing of Mr. Crossley, and having stated that I would produce a bill different intirely to the bill in 1781, made out by him to Mrs. Brumidgham alone. I say, gentlemen, that knowing all this, previous to this indictment; I thought it a duty incumbent upon me, though it was the night before term, I conceived it my duty to come in the behalf of these defendants; I thought it my duty to take care that these men should not intrust their case in the hands of another Counsel, wi, though much more capable of conducting it, had not been a witness to those transactions which my brief states, and which will be proved to you in the clearest manner. Gentlemen, let me repeat what passed before Mr. Lowton; Mr. Lowton had made his award: and he told Mr. Crossley so, Snelling being the plaintiff in thisagainst Crossley. Is not it strange; is not it incredible, is not it inconsistent with human belief, that a man who was awake, and an attorney too, and so smart and acute an attorney, and being concerned in many causes as I have very recently seen him concerned in; could sit still when I was to prove him guilty; when I was to state him guilty of perjury; and it was summed up by the Judge that the verdict should be given against him, and he never take any objection; he never says, my Lord this is not my hand-writing; he never told any one man living at the time; he does not even affect surprize, but suffers a verdict for sixty pounds, which must contaminate his character. Gentlemen, is not all this perfectly unaccountable? and now this night, when Mr. Crossley is called upon to account for it; why, he says it is a great distance of time, and he does not recollect, and he is not much given to attend to arguments of Counsel; and really wishes, gentlemen, to prevail on you to believe, that when he was there present in Court, and when his honour, his property, may his very existence, were at stake, that he was so unconcerned as not to listen to what the plaintiff's Counsel was going to produce in Court! Gentlemen, suppose the cause now trying, was against one of you, and the question was, whether you had given credit to A and B; you having sworn that you only gave credit to A, and the Counsel against you was ready to produce your own bill to contradict your affidavit, and make you guilty of perjury; would you be able to suppress your indignation? would not you be apt to break through the common rules of decency, to snatch it out of the hands of that man who held it up to you, to see by what soul practice it had been put into the hands of any Counsel to state? But instead of that, Mr. Crossley, without making an observation, and expressing no desire to look at it, not even after it was laid on the table, to see if it differed from that which he delivered out! - And Mr. Lowten will tell you, if it had been produced before him, he neither would not nor could have made the award he did! Gentlemen, Mr. Crossley gives no reason for all this, only says it is a great length of time, and takes out his smelling bottle - not at all well - might be instructing his Counsel! Now, Gentlemen, do me the favour to observe the purport of the receipts which are at different times, and of course, as he himself seems to admit in his examination were given at the times he received the money; for to be sure, when a man receives money, he gives a receipt; Mr. Crossley says that in general they were received of the persons and on the dates which the receipts themselves purport; now here are the different receipts, the first is,

"Received this 28th day of July, 1779,

"of Mr. Snelling, on account ten pounds

"ten, for Mrs. Brumidgham's business." Gentlemen, it may be said, that a man's paying money on account is the best proof that he is the debtor; but I will prove to you, as men of sense and as men of honour, after you have looked at these receipts (and you never can condemn any set of men, any of your fellow creatures, without taking a very serious view indeed of these papers). Gentlemen, what will you say if I prove to you, that on this very day he received that ten pounds, ten shillings, not from Mr. Snelling, of whom he says it was received, but I will prove to you, from Mrs. Brumidgham, that she paid him the money, and, that this is an absolute fabrication, a forgery; and had no existence before: The next is

"Received, the 3d of November,

"1779, of Mrs. Brumidgham,

"10 l. on account of the cause, Wortley

"and Brumidgham; and, in part of the

"bill delivered to her and Mr. Snelling." Now mark the art of this; I do protest, if the observation does not strike you, I shall conceive, that my mind is most singularly constituted; the receipts, by Mrs. Brumidgham's account, stood thus: -

"Received, this 28th of July, 1779,

"10 l. 10 s. on account of the law business

"under my care." He alters that to


" from Mr. Snelling." When Mrs. Brumidgham paid him the sum of money on the 3d of November, 1779, he gave this receipt,

"Received, this 3d of November,

"1779, 10 l. on account of my bill delivered;" Mrs. Brumidgham will swear that is the receipt, nay more, the person who copied this receipt, will come and swear this to be the receipt; when he had the opportunity of altering this receipt, he makes it thus:

"Received 10 l. 10 s. in

"part of my bill delivered to her and Mr.

"Snelling;" and this, to make you believe most undoubtedly, that the credit was given to them jointly: there are five receipts; they are every one of them substituted. Gentlemen, when Mr. Crossley found there was a verdict against him for 60 l. and that Lord Mansfield had made this declaration in Court; and feeling deeply, the situation he was in, he was extremely anxious to have this matter compromised; Mr. Holloway appears, on Mr. Lowe's evidence, to be a friend of all parties; and who wished to stop the very indictment that he is now charged with, Holloway knew nothing of these transactions, the name of Holloway does not appear in this cause, till after Mr. Lowton had made his award; and till after Lord Mansfield had made the declaration in a public and open Court, but Mr. Holloway knew of that sort of declaration; that Mr. Crossley had been guilty of a wilful, wicked, and deliberate perjury: in what? in the affidavit for holding Snelling to bail: Gentlemen, let me put this question to you, remember it may be your own case to be overpowered by false testimony, and remember, that the very same measure you make, it shall be measured to you again; I have the best opinion, both of your understandings and integrity; what evidence, in the name of God, is there before you? attend to this observation; what evidence is there before you, that Mr. Holloway knew, or had any reason to believe, that Lord Mansfield was wrong in the opinion that he declared in Court? What reason had he to believe, that that affidavit was not a forged affidavit? is there a tirtle of evidence of it; they want to make you believe, that the evidence was fabricated, on which the verdict was obtained for the malicious arrest; let me put this question to you, suppose you had been in Court yourselves, any of you, and had found the question was, whether Mr. Crossley had made a false affidavit or no, when he swore, that Snelling was indebted to him in 100 l? If you had heard from Mr. Lowton, that upon inspecting the books of Mr. Crossley, that upon inspecting the bills, that from his own evidence, he was clearly and conscientiously of opinion there was nothing due; should not you have had a reasonable ground to suspect, that Mr. Crossley was guilty of perjury: remember, you are not trying Mr. Holloway, for that he, believing Mr. Crossley to be a guilty person, wanted to compound his guilt; it is one thing to let off a guilty man for a sum of money; and another thing to prosecute an innocent man, knowing him to be innocent; and, gentlemen, in the name of God, what evidence is there before you, that Holloway, at that moment, did not believe him guilty? you never heard his name, but he is accidentally in court; and he finds, that Mr. Crossley is in a scrape; and all that Holloway does, is endeavouring to get a compromise; I say, taking this Mr. Crossley's evidence to be true, you will consider, that these defendants cannot be called as witnesses for one another. Now Gentlemen, with respect to poor Mr. Stephens, who stands there with a very contented countenance, what is he brought here to answer for? What is his motive? What quarrel ever took place between him and Mr. Crossley? What should induce him to ruin Mr. Crossley? What should induce him to believe Mr. Crossley to be innocent? Gentlemen, as soon as those bills were deposited in the hands of Mr. Lowes, certainly somehow or other Mr. Crossley got at them; they were proved in Court in their original state; he alters the bills and all the different receipts; having done that, he knows he is safe against the indictment for perjury; says he, I will prove that all the accounts are quite different to what the Gentlemen suppose; and he refused to pay the rest of

the money, and he said he would not pay a farthing of the debt and costs; then he brings a writ of error, and then he hangs it up: he alters the bill, it is the very same bill, he takes away the receipts and substitutes another, and now those receipts, which will be by and bye given to you, appear most evidently to be made all at one time; some are dated in 1780, and some in 1779, and it is very extraordinary, that a man, when he gives a receipt, should put it on the same paper with a former one, the very same papers will join, so that they have been all written on a sheet of paper at the same time.

Court. That applies to two of them, not to all?

Mr. Erskine. Yes, my Lord; all these receipts are on the same slip of paper, and they appear evidently to be written at the same time; I will call Mrs. Brumidgham, who will tell you positively that they are not the same, and have all been altered; if this turns out to be the case, surely it must make a great impression upon your minds, and it is not a very extraordinary thing that Mr. Snelling is not here to night, Mr. Crossley has not thought fit to bring him here, he is not standing here to be tried, and yet all the consequences of his guilt (taking him to be guilty) is to be fastened upon others: Suppose for a moment that Mr. Snelling had made this promise to Mr. Crossley, what is every attorney to be indicted for a conspiracy because he is missed by his client? Then what does Holloway do, he is the friend of both parties, and he wants to get a compromise between Mr. Crossley, Priddle and Snelling, who were going on with an indictment for perjury: when this prosecution is afterwards brought forward, Mr. Holloway's name is not mentioned, and, in my poor judgement, there cannot be any one article of evidence that can be twisted into this trial, that Holloway knew that Snelling had actually employed Mr. Crossley; you never see Snelling and Holloway in a situation together, the whole of the evidence is perfectly clear of such a charge; but even if there were, it is not the offence with which Mr. Holloway is charged by this indictment: But Gentlemen, when the cause is called on, and the witnesses are to be called out of Court, what does Holloway do? Why he declares in the open face of the Court, and my Lord had the humanity, as you recollect, Gentlemen, to say, that he remembered Mr. Holloway saying at the trial of Mr. Crossley, that he was subpoened, but did not know what he was to prove: Gentlemen, I may also observe, that Mr. Holloway is placed in a situation that may render it extremely inconvenient to the publick, if he is convicted; who will over venture to prosecute any man, or who will venture to be present when a compromise is going on? Is there any harm in supposing a man guilty, declared so by his country, and by the Judge, and by the arbitrator, whether he is guilty or not God knows; that must be left to his own conscience: has Mr. Crossley brought any one person to night to prove, that he asserted his innocence? Gentlemen, the man that is not brought before you, Snelling, is the only one that can be guilty of this charge, for he must have known it; but non constat Priddle did know it, and then he employs Priddle to bring that action; is Priddle proved to have fabricated that bill? Will any man say, that if Mr. Priddle puts in evidence, which is sufficient in the opinion of one of the greatest Judges, and of a dispassionate Jury to prove Mr. Crossley guilty? If Mr. Lowton's award is put into the scale, had not Mr. Priddle a right to believe, that Mr. Crossley was guilty? Gentlemen, I say, that even if you believe Mr. Crossley, you can have no colour or right to convict any of the defendants; for if you should be of opinion, that Holloway and Stephens knowing that this man was guilty, or believing him to be so, thought it a fit thing to get a sum of money out of him; that does not weigh one feather in the balance of this case; and I submit it to your consideration, whether you ought to consign men over to penalties,

and drive them from society; when the question you are to try on your oath is, whether Holloway knew Mr. Crossley was innocent or not? and there is no man who has stated a circumstance, that can lead you to say, that they have any reason to believe Mr. Crossley was innocent: and if not, there is not a colour for treating them, as they have been loaded to night: Holloway appears to have been the friend of all parties, and as a compensation, Mr. Crossley thought fit to pay him, by giving him ten guineas: Mappleback is a man of some note, but as to Mr. Sambridge, he is the enemy of Holloway in his profession; and with respect to his evidence, it is very extraordinary, that Holloway should be so extremely unguarded, and so very foolish, as he represents him to be. Gentlemen, thus the case stands; if you are of opinion this bill was the actual authentic bill delivered into Court, then nobody is guilty of the conspiracy; for there never can be a conspiracy to prosecute a man that is guilty: The first thing to be shewn is, that he is innocent; and the next thing is, to shew that there was reasonable or probable cause to believe him guilty; suppose you should not believe that this bill was as I assert it to be, but that Snelling actually did give that order that Mr. Crossley states, that would be evidence to convict Snelling; but in order to convict any other of the prisoners, it must appear, that they knew that Snelling had given that order, Snelling was so far from telling them, that he made his affidavit in the face of the Court, got a verdict in that action, and there is not any one conversation in which you find Snelling communicating to any one of these defendants, that in fact he had no cause of action: If Snelling is guilty, and it was known to the other prisoners, they are connected most undoubtedly in the iniquity; but because a man is wicked enough to bring a false action, is his attorney to be indicted as a conspirator. There would be an end to the administration of justice, if that was the case.

With respect to Holloway and Stephens, it does not appear that they ever were connected with the business, till after the trial in the King's Bench, and that trial was reasonable and probable cause for them to believe Mr. Crossley was guilty, even if they were proved to be prosecutors, which they are not. Gentlemen, I am extremely sorry you have been detained here so late at night; you have had a great deal of abuse thrown out against these persons; they cannot give evidence for one another; and there is an observation that will well become you to attend to; whenever you have reason to doubt the evidence of living witnesses, who come to speak under the influence of malice, even if they were of a higher description than Mr. Crossley is, whom I do not mean to impeach, that observation is this, that the safe resort of all Juries, is to have recourse to written evidence, which cannot lie, and which could not be fabricated. If you believe that written evidence, will not you be of opinion most clearly, that there is something foul and something dark in this business; and will not you see most clearly that the conspiracy turns the other way; that Mr. Crossley has conspired with other persons to ruin these men? Gentlemen, I shall trouble you no longer, only to remind you this is a severe prosecution, that the consequences are extremely heavy, and I am sure that you will never subject any of your fellow citizens to such consequences; when you must see that none of these defendants could possibly believe that Mr. Crossley was innocent, and that every thing they have done is perfectly legal, and nothing censurable in their conduct, except their wishing to prevent Mr. Crossley the disgrace of that prosecution.


I served a notice on Mr. Crossley for him to bring his books; it was served about twelve or one this morning, at the Rose, over the way.

Court. If this notice had been served at eight this morning, on Mr. Crossley, at

his residence, before he left it, it would have been in time.


Mr. Erskine. Did not Mr. Crossley produce his books before you? - Yes.

Did you examine the books? - I did, and from his books I judged on his case; I wish his books were here.

Did you examine them fully and correctly? - I did.

Did he deliver any bills? - He did not deliver any; there were bills laid before me on the behalf of Mr. Snelling.

Did Mr. Crossley attend you? - He did.

Had he an opportunity of seeing those bills that were delivered on the behalf of Mr. Snelling? - Yes.

There were bills delivered to you, purporting to be bills which Mr. Crossley had delivered? - Yes.

Were those bills seen by Mr. Crossley? - Yes, they were.

Did he object to any of them, as spurious, or fabricated, or different from what he had delivered? - He did not; Mr. Crossley was heard, and produced his books, and I examined his books; he never complained of what I had done.

Put in the award.

Mr. Garrow. I object to the award; one single fact, that Mr. Lowton made an award, is all I conceive that can be stated.

Mr. Erskine. Which way did you make the award? - In favour of Mr. Snelling.

Was it known to Mr. Snelling that the award was in his favour? - Yes.

To West. Did you examine the record in the cause of Snelling against Crossley? - I did.

Look at that, and see whether that is a copy of the record? - It is.

Was you in Court when that action was tried? - No, I was not.

To Mr. Lowton. You was examined in the course of this cause? - I was.

Do you recollect Mr. Priddle's being in Court? - I do, Priddle was attorney for Snelling; Priddle knew also of the award that I had made.

Was Mr. Snelling in the Court, during that time? - He was.

Mr. Erskine, to Mr. Crossley. Was Holloway in Court? - I believe he was; he told me he was a witness.

Was Stephens in Court? - He was examined as a witness.

To West. Did you make any copy of a bill in the possession of Mr. Priddle; is that your hand writing? - This is my hand writing; I copied it from this.

Where did you get the bill, you copied this from? - Mr. Priddle gave it me.


Mr. Erskine. Did you employ Mr. Crossley to defend any action for you? - Yes.

Was it yourself that employed him?

Court. I think you are not at liberty to give evidence to prove Mr. Crossley's evidence false.

Did you receive any bill of fees and disbursements from Mr. Crossley? - I certainly did.

Do you recollect the date of it? - I cannot recollect the date.

What did you do with the bill when you got it? - I put it by; he delivered the bill to me, and I put in a little drawer, in a bureau or book-case.

What became of it afterwards? - I should think I did not part with it till I gave it to Mr. Priddle; I paid him several sums of money; he gave as good receipts as any man in the world.

How many sums did you pay him? - I cannot say.

How many receipts had you in all? - I cannot tell.

What sums did you pay him? - There was 10 l. and 12 l. there were more than two of 10 l. I think.

What did you do with the receipts? - I put them by.

Where are they? - I gave them to Priddle.

Should you know the receipts if you saw them? - I think I should; they were receipts to me.

Can you read? - Yes.

Read that, is that one of the receipts that was given to you? - That certainly is one.

Look at that? - That is not it; my receipts were worn very much; Mr. Priddle certainly has my receipts.

Look at that? - These were mine.

Were they as clean? - I am not clear, but I rather think that I folded them, if not in the common way as they sold them up, in four, and put them into a little drawer.

Then they are not your receipts? - No Sir, not all, on my dying pillow, I could have the sacrament administered to me on that.

Did Mr. Crossley ever make any demand on you? - He never did, he always treated me like a gentlewoman.

Court. Are you sure you folded them up, and put them in a drawer? - Yes.

Then you gave them to Mr. Priddle? - Yes.

You did not carry them about in your pockets? - No.

Mr. Fielding. How long have you resumed the name of Brumidgham? - Ever since the year 1763.

How are the accounts settled between you and Snelling? - They are not settled at all.

How much is he in your debt now? - In May 1783, Mr. Crossley sued out a writ against Snelling at my suit, the sum is 400 l. and Snelling gave me this bond for 300 l. this man had owed me a great deal of money that was in his hands; Mr. Crossley knew that; Mr. Crossley was intimate with me a considerable time; he knew of my distresses; I am at work now for my daily bread.

Your situation at present is rather an unhappy one, you are obliged to work for your living? - Yes Sir; at the time I applied to Mr. Crossley to get this money out of the hands of Mr. Snelling, my circumstances were better; I had then about 300 l. by me, which put me into the shop I have now; I had 300 l. by me when I gave Mr. Crossley those directions; Mr. Snelling lived in Bandy-leg-walk; he was down at Warley Common occasionally.

Who kept the booth there? - I did.

Was not he there the better part of the week? - No, he was a man of business at that time.

Did not you live with Mr. Snelling and pass for his wife? - Never in my life; Mr. Crossley never knew me but to be Mrs. Brumidgham.

Did you never go by the name of Snelling? - Never by my consent or by my desire.

Were you never called Mrs. Snelling? - I certainly have Sir, I never can account for what people call me; it never was my desire; all the business that I transacted in my life, was by the name of Brumidgham.

How ever disagreeable it was to you, the fact was, that the people called you Mrs. Snelling? - Some persons did; they might probably.

Am I to understand that the people, (however disagreeable to you) did call you Mrs. Snelling? - I certainly have been called Snelling, there is not a doubt of it.

In the publick way, at least the people use to take the liberty of calling you Mrs. Snelling? - Yes.

This for a considerable time? - I do not know Sir.

The people used to take the liberty of calling you by this name for several years? - The people that did not know me; but nobody that knew me or any of my private concerns.

Mr. Erskine. Did Mr. Crossley ever call you by the name of Snelling? - No Sir, never; he knew me to be Mrs. Brumidgham.

Mr. Fielding. How came you to load your pockets with all these papers and parchments? - I did not know but they might be wanted.

Do you know whether Mr. Snelling was ever impudent enough to say that he lived with you as his wife? - I do not know that he ever did say so.

Upon your oath? - I really cannot say what he might say, he was a man of business at that time.

Do not you know that he gave out to people, that you was his wife, and that he lived with you as such? - I do not think he ever did, or that he ever gave me the appellation of wife in his life.

Court. Whose house did you live in? - I lived in Mr. Snelling's house; he was bail for me in the action when I was first arrested.

How many more inmates were there? - Sometimes nobody, sometimes the house was let to other persons.

How long did you live in this house? - I should suppose for six years; I was always Mrs. Brumidgham, with Mr. Crossley.

How came it that Mr. Snelling should be possessed of the full half of your property, four hundred pounds? - The bond is but three, however.

Well then, I will take it for three; how happened it that you should intrust so large a sum of money with Snelling? - I do not know, so it was; I had his note that had been for two or three years standing, and that writ was sued out by Mr. Crossley; he sued out that action for this note.

Had you any husband alive at that time? - Yes Sir, I had; I knew where he was, and so did Mr. Crossley; he went to his sister, to subpoenea her upon the trial, and when the trial was at Westminster, Mr. Crossley knows that my husband came there, and eat beef-stakes and onions.

Have you seen Snelling lately? - I believe it may be five or six weeks since I saw him.

Did he ever tell you that he attended the trial of Mr. Crossley for perjury? - I was turned out of Court and every body else was.

Then you did not hear him say in Court, that you had lived with him as his wife? - I did not.

Did he never tell you that he said so, afterwards? - No, Sir, he did not, indeed.

Did you never ask him how Mr. Crossley became acquitted so easily? - I heard how it was in the Court.

Mr. Erskine. Mr. Crossley always called you by the name of Brumidgham? - Yes.

Mr. Fielding. Upon your oath, did not you desire Mr. Crossley to call you by the name of Snelling in particular company? - I do not think he ever did; I am sure he could not.

You know Mr. How's, in Tower-street? - Yes.

He was an acquaintance of Snelling's as well as your's? - Yes, I never assumed any other name in my life.

Snelling's business was country business; he never had any in town? - It was Snelling's house, and I was called Snelling in it, and so at the camp.

How came Mr. Crossley to know any thing of your confinement at Warley-common? - Snelling came to town to him, and he came to me.

When he wrote to you, he always addressed you by the name of Brumidgham? - He certainly did Sir.

Did Mr. Crossley know you was a woman of property? - Yes Sir, he soon became acquainted with it; he never asked me for money in his life but he had it.

Mr. Holloway to Alexander. When I saw you at Guildhall, when I was subpoened against Mr. Crossley, whether I did not express a little dislike to appear against Mr. Crossley, and whether I did not ask him how he could think I was his enemy? - What I know of what Mr. Holloway observed to me in the Hall was, says he, I came here on this business; but says he, I know nothing of it.

Mr. Garrow to Mr. Alexander. Was you acquainted with Snelling? - I have seen him at Mr. Crossley's; this woman was backwards and forwards there; I knew her by the name of sometimes Snelling, and sometimes Brumidgham.

JOHN HALL sworn.

What are you? - A butcher.

Do you know Mr. Mappleback? - Yes.

Have you seen him here to day? - Yes.

How long have you known him? - Five or six years.

Would you believe Mappleback upon his oath? - I would not from the character I have heard of him.

Mr. Garrow. Master Hall, you have got a fine waistcoat on, we are dressed most of us for the term, which of the Courts do you go to from here? - None at all.

That trade of bailing (as money is scarce) is pretty well knocked up with you, they tell me? - I never had any trade there.

Do you know Westminster Hall? - Yes.

When you swore yourself worth 2000 l. the Court of Common Pleas would not accept you for ten pounds? - I am not worth so little as two thousand pounds; then nor now, I am worth it; they did not accept of my bail.

That strange Court of Common Pleas would not take your bail; the Court of Common Peas, insisted on having the money first paid, as it was so small a sum, do you swear that? - That was the answer that my Lord Chief Justice gave me.

Perhaps his Lordship asked you where you came from, where did you describe yourself to live at that time? - I dare say it is five or six years ago since I attempted to justify for any body.

By what description did you attempt to justify? - It was to oblige a person.

By what description, how did you describe yourself? - For what I know I might live in the Kent road.

But by what description did you attempt to justify bail for that ten pounds? - I cannot attempt to recollect that; I described myself as a salesman.

Where do you keep your shop? - In the Borough, High-street; I am a butcher; I live there now.

Where did you describe yourself to live? - It might be at Kilbar; it is so many years ago, I have forgot.

Do you know Mr. Nayler? - Yes.

Has not he a judgement against you for six pounds? - I believe not; I do not suppose he has.

Has not he had it for six years, and cannot get it, do you mean to swear that is not true? - I will not swear that, I did bail one Dr. Fitz Jo, at the request of a friend.

Who was the gentleman that you attempted to bail for that ten pounds? - A Gentleman in the country, a person that asked me as a favour; I was to have nothing for my trouble; I was an hired bail.

Holloway to Mappleback. Did not you meet me on the other side Westminster-bridge, and I then said to you, Mr. Mappleback, to my astonishment, I hear you are to be an evidence against me, and you took me by the hand and said, you knew nothing of it, and could prove nothing against me? - I was riding over Black-fryars-bridge, and Holloway called after me, and Mr. Sambidge was with him; says he, I have sixteen or twenty pounds to pay; oh! says he, what a damned thing it is, we cannot make it up; says he, here is Priddle in the coach; says I, how do you do Priddle; I went to Sambidge's to meet him, but he never came.

Where was I to meet you? - At Mr. Sambidge's that night.

Mr. Garrow to Mappleback. Do you know Hall? - I know nothing of Hall, but he borrowed three guineas of me and I never got it again.

Is Hall to be believed upon his out? - He is a man not worth two-pence; I can borrow 100 l. where he cannot borrow a penny.


I served Mr. Holloway with a subpoenea, on the 8th of November last, to attend that trial.

Mr. Garrow. Who are you? - David Finley .

You served a subpoena; who are you? - I am in the profession of the law.

Whose clerk are you? - I am not clerk to any body, nor have not been for years.

In what character did you serve the subpoenea on Mr. Holloway? - As a friend to Mr. Priddle, without fee or reward.

In what character did you attend the trial? - Merely out of curiosity.

Do you know, Mr. Hall, the witness, who has been examined here? - Hall the butcher; I have seen him I believe, once or twice in my life, in the Borough.

Have you never seen him in Westminster-hall? - Never in my life that I know of; I never heard of it.

Mr. Erskine. My Lord, we have done.

Mr. Silvester. May it please your Lordship, and you Gentlemen of the Jury, to favour me at this early hour with attention, to a few observations in reply; I am sure I do not wish to take up more of your time than is absolutely necessary, but it is a duty which I owe to the publick as well as to myself and to make some remarks, not only upon the curious defence set up by my learned friend, but on the evidence given, both on the part of the prosecution and of the defendants; my learned friend set out with saying, that he was shocked and surprised at a great deal which he had heard in the course of this trial, and that he imagined you must have felt as he did, to hear such a charge against persons of the character and situation of his clients, or, as he very singularly and remarkably expressed and described them from those who sent him hither: But Gentlemen, the question will be, whether he has either by his observation, or by his evidence in any manner, impeached the testimony I have adduced, in support of that charge? he talks very much about the probable cause these defendants had for instituting this indictment; whether they had or not a probable cause, is a matter of fact as well as law, which you are the judges of, and upon which you must determine by your verdict; my learned friend stated, that I had not paid any compliments to the prosecutor of this indictment, I own I forbore, however ample the field might be; it was not my wish, and I trust never will be my practice to prejudice the minds of a Jury; I therefore left the case to its own merits, stating only that these defendants had been guilty of a foul conspiracy, to deprive Mr. Crossley of his character, by accusing him of perjury. I have now a right to say, (because it has been found in evidence, because a Jury of his country have decided it) that he was not guilty of the perjury in the indictment hatched by the defendants. And I am further warranted to assert, that so far as my learned friend endeavoured to insinuate imputations of perjury even on the evidence that has been called this day, you will by and by see on which side that evidence attached, and on which side that evidence deserves credit: My learned friend stated to you, that Mr. Crossley had altered the bills delivered to Mr. Priddle, and he pledged himself to you, that he would prove, that the bills delivered by Mr. Crossley to Mr. Snelling and Mrs. Brumidgham, were afterwards altered for the purpose of this prosecution; a little recollection will shew how malicious that accusation is; the bills were delivered to Mrs. Brumidgham, and from her they came to Mr. Priddle; Mr. Priddle delivered them to Mr. Lowes, and he brings them into Court; upon the face of the first bill, you will see that alteration does not exist in fact; of course then that assertion falls to the ground: But says my learned friend, there must be a forgery in this business, so there undoubtedly was, and there is no question on which side that forgery was committed; was it not committed by the defendants, or one of them and his associates, for the purpose of proving Mr. Crossley guilty? Mr. Erskine says, as to the bill, he Mr. Crossley said, he delivered the first to Snelling, and now proceeds Mr. Erskine; I will prove to you Gentlemen, that the first bill was delivered to Mrs. Brumidgham; has he proved that fact? far from it, for Mrs. Brumidgham does not recollect the date of the first bill delivered, again my learned friend says, what influence had Holloway over Priddle? Why says he, Mr. Holloway; was sebpoenad upon that trial? Is that the fact? Is Mr. Holloway that unwilling witness? Is he that man, forced contrary to his inclination to attend? He afterwards said so, it is true; but he told Mr. Sambidge himself, that it was a concerted

scheme, it is therefore clearly part of the conspiracy itself, it is a part of the very fraud, that Mr. Holloway's name did not appear on the back of that indictment; my learned friend says, Stephens had no interest; then how came he on the back of the bill? How came his name there together with Mr. Snelling's and Mr. Priddle's? The question is, whether or no it has not been a conspiracy by these four persons, to prosecute Mr. Crossley, for this supposed this trumped up perjury? An observation has been made likewise, that Snelling is not here before you. Why, Gentlemen, a moment's consideration gives that observation quite a new aspect, for by Snelling not being here, we are precluded from giving in evidence before you, several conversations that would have explained the whole of that transaction; my learned friend concludes his speech, by attacking Mappleback, and stating, that Mr. Sambridge having quarrelled with Mr. Holloway, is a foe to him; Mr. Crossley he says also comes here a bitter foe to him; there is no imputation upon Mr. Crossley or Mr. Sambridge's character, yet they are both above the reach of malice, nor within the Pale of censure, but from the misfortune of ever having any communication with the defendants, yet they are to be attacked; my learned friend at the same time throwing such an imputation upon Mr. Lowes, a Barrister of high respect, and unimpeachable character, that if what he says is true, Mr. Lowes must be guilty of perjury; for he has sworn, that these very papers, which he received of Mr. Priddle, he returned to Priddle's hand; nobody altered them, and if they had been altered, he must have known it: Gentlemen, after this, Mr. Erskine proceeds to call his witnesses: The first evidence he produces is Mr. Lowton, and after having attempted by all his ingenuity to bring before you what he knew was not evidence, that is, what Lord Mansfield and Mr. Lowton had said at a different place; and having dwelt much on the indignation that noble peer expressed at the time, he tells you, that it had that effect on the mind of Priddle, as to induce him to believe, that Mr. Crossley had been guilty of perjury; suppose it had, should they on a surmise, prefer an indictment against Mr. Crossley, without any enquiry into the transaction? But is that the case? Had it that effect on their minds? Were they impressed with any idea that he had been guilty of perjury? Did they take up that idea immediately and prefer an indictment? No, they staid to attempt to make an advantage of Mr. Crossley; they had an eye to Mr. Crossley's property; they endeavoured to frighten him; was it from the motive of what they heard in the Court? No, it was for the purpose of getting money, that he was a good milch cow, and from him they would get hundreds: that was their motive, it is proved in evidence by several witnesses, that the defendant said, that if Mr. Crossley would come down handsome, they themselves would not go on with the prosecution; shall they then shelter themselves by what was said in a Court of Justice, when that learned Judge was misled by those very papers which Holloway boasted had only been fabricated seven days? Gentlemen, whatever Mr. Holloway may express now, I wish he had felt a little before he had done it: was Mr. Crossley mistaken in the information he received from Mr. Snelling? What passed in company with Mr. Alexander, a man of reputation, a man of character? Snelling was angry with Crossley, because he wanted to put an end to the whole transaction, but Mr. Crossley did not expect false bills to be produced against him; therefore Mr. Alexander did not attend that trial: Gentlemen, when you consider what is proved in evidence, of Holloway's boasting the day after that trial, and laughing at Crossley, and calling him a fool, because he did not know his own hand writing, but saying to Mr. Sambridge, that he was a good milch cow, that he had had two ten pounds, and would have more of him; you cannot suppose for a moment, that Holloway ever believed Mr.Crossley was guilty of the perjury? So far from it, that he admits that the cause of this prosecution was to have money; on but says Mr. Erskine, you never saw Holloway's name till after that trial; why who was the go-between? Who was at the Leaping Bar? Who went to Mr. Lowes's? and who attended at the Mitre when the money was paid? - Holloway and Priddle. Was there no connection then? But pray was there no connection between them? Why how came all these people at the trial, and when the bill is preferred, Holloway boasts, that he had instructed the witnesses what to say? that Priddle, on consultation with him, previous to the indictment being preferred, thought it was better to leave him out of the bill; and as to Stephens, why they all go together to consult Priddle, and Priddle and Stephens go out together; and when they come in again, says Stephens, by God it shall not be settled under 200 l. and if the Jury find a bill of indictment, then we will have 500 l.? Did he do this for the sake of justice? No. Gentlemen, is there a single witness to prove that at any one time they ever prosessed to believe that Mr. Crossley was guilty? Did Snelling himself believe that affidavit to be false, because that is an argument made use of; for if he had believed it, then he had a probable cause for the prosecution of Mr. Crossley: Could he believe it? it is inconsistent with his conversation throughout the whole transaction; and when they all separately wished to make it up; nay even Snelling himself wanted to make it up; he says he is urged on by Holloway and Priddle; Stephens says, when Priddle wants him to be bail for a man of the name of Grant; no, says he, he shall not; I will do nothing for him, unless you indict Crossley; says he, we shall get a thousand out of him; he has money, and will not have the scandal of a trial: Well but my learned friend says, Mrs. Ann Brumidgham is to be a very material witness in this business; she is to prove that those receipts are not the receipis she received from Crossley; and an observation is made that two of the bills are written on the same paper; that is likely enough, and Priddle has ingenuity enough to do that; now it seems to me that the making the two edges meet is not a very difficult thing; supposing two pieces of paper, and these are taken together, laid level, and cut down with a knife, and then notch them a little, and they will match pretty near together; but if by accident they should, is that sufficient for you to impute perjury to Mr. Lowes? - What will you say to Priddle applying to Mr. Lowes to get these papers; and on receiving them from him, looks them over and says they are right; if he meant fair, Priddle should have preferred his indictment first, and given Mr. Lowes notice to produce the bills; no, but he threatens Mr. Lowes to move the Court of King's Bench against him; and at last forces Mr. Lowes to give up the bills; What is Mr. Crossley's conduct, but the conduct of a very innocent man; says he, give them to him; but Mr. Lowes had the precaution to take copies of those bills before they were delivered, knowing the man he had to deal with; therefore it is clear that these bills came back into the possession of Priddle, for him to make any alteration he thought proper in; and with respect to Mr. Crossley knowing Mrs. Brumidgham's name too, that was perfectly clear; that was proved before, because Mr. Crossley is employed on the behalf of Mr. Snelling, and pleads that she is a married woman, and married to a man of the name of Brumidgham, and therefore is not liable to the debt; at last it did come out that many people called her Snelling; and she confirms Mr. Crossley in another part of the story, that he went to Warley Common to bail her. The next evidence is a curious one, Mr Hall, the butcher; and Gentlemen, you know, when a debt is to small as 10 l. few enquiries are made into the ability of the person that becomes bail; but I have a right to say that he was not worth 2000 l. If the Court thought fit toreject him for 10 l. and I think you are of opinion that not much credit is to be paid to such witnesses. The next witness has proved just nothing at all; but the service of a subpoena. Now, Gentlemen, as you have heard the evidence of Mrs. Brumidgham, of Mr. Lowton, of Mr. Hall, I have a right to ask you is there any thing in their testimony that alters the case I opened at first? if there is not, you have my learned friend's opinion, that the charge is so strong against the defendants as to convict them; I need not call a better witness than Mr. Erskine himself; for if you lay Mr. Crossley's evidence intirely out of the case, you then have the evidence of Mappleback; if you believe him, whom my learned friend admits to be a man of undoubted character, that is sufficient to convict them. Damn him, says Holloway, I will do him over, by God, I will indict him; we shall get 1000 l. out of him; you know I was at the making the agreement; he is a good milch cow; I have got 20 l. out of him already: that was before the indictment was found; and after the bill is found, his language is, that bill is found, damn him we will do him up, if he does not come down: are you acquainted, Mr. Mappleback, with Crossley? No, he was a perfect stranger, says Priddle to Mappleback, (who like a good-natured man wishes he could put an end to this business) says Priddle, you shall give 300 l. (and he said he would bo damned it he took less) then they came to 200 l. Holloway less diligent in his part of the scene, urges Crossley, and argues; this indictment will be the ruin of you! And with respect to the testimony of Mr. Mappleback, his son married Priddle's daughter: what connection there may be, I cannot say; but if you believe the evidence, it is sufficient to convict all the three defendants; for do they pretend at any one time that they believed the story of the perjury to be true, and that it was for the sake of justice? no, give me my securities and 300 l. and here is an end of the whole transaction. But Gentlemen, when Mr. Sambridge comes to give his evidence, be opens such a scene against Mr. Holloway, that it makes me shudder to think there is such a person, so vile a miscreant, such a disgrace to human nature, and the honor of mankind as Holloway, to be found in the world; and I have a right to say what you must be convinced of, that Mr. Sambridge comes here to give his testimony as an honest man; and has delivered it with much steadiness, eandour and impartiality. With respect to Stephens; why in the presence of Mr. Lowes, Stephens says, that he would find money to prosecute. Gentlemen, I have hastily run over the heads of the evidence, and I must make this observation to you, that if you believe the testimony on the part of the prosecution, in point of law, all three of the defendants are guilty of the conspiracy: four men conspiring together to indict another, unless they have good and probable cause, which must be proved to you by evidence, and legal evidence; not by suspicion, not by surmise; I say you must find them guilty: the only way you can judge of their mind and intentions is from their conduct at the time of the first trial for the malicious arrest; they are all there, and Mr. Erskine makes it an argument in favour of the prisoners; but it convinces me that they had then some plan in contemplation to attack or ruin Mr. Crossly; which plan, I say, rests in their breasts, and they all meet there for the purpose of carrying it on. What is their conduct afterwards? Why they discover the fraud to Sambridge, who they thought was their friend, and that long before the bill was found. Gentlemen, had these defendants any cause to say that this Mr. Crossley has committed the crime of perjury. A Jury of his country have acquitted him of that charge; they thought the charge foul, and these men knew it to be so, better they came before a Court of Justice. These men have evaded the justice of their country, for a long time; but justice though slow, is sure, and I trust the time is now come when it has overtakenthem; when they by their own folly have discovered their iniquity, and that the measure of their iniquities is now full; it is high time that a stop should be but to their niquity, for the measure of it is now running over: God knows who they may apply to next, whether some of you Gentlemen, or even my laarned friend himself, may not be the subject of a foul conspiracy, conducted by men who are so artful, so hackneyed in the ways of wickedness that nothing could resist them; well then might Mr. Crossley be frightened and shudder at the idea of the hands he had got into; and it has been made an argument, to prove Mr. Crossley's guilt; because he was silent when these false papers were produced in a Court of Justice. Now I confess it is the conduct of any honest man, to hold down his head, and say, good God! I am a ruined man; here is a forgery against me; and this forgery so executed, I cannot distinguish it from reality; why Gentlemen, perjury is the next step to forgery, and I do not wonder Mr. Crossley should say, if my property is not worth having, my life they will have next: he suspected forgery from the evidence he heard in Court, but the next day he had full proof of the transaction from the mouth of Holloway himself; and because Mr. Crossley did not instantly bring them to justice, it is now to be made an argument against him, that he had not resolution enough to combat it: it was enough to strike any man dumb; it did strike Mr. Crossley dumb; and Mr. Erskine says, he never moved for a new trial; but what advantage could he have had from a new trial? he had no evidence of the fraud, but that man; with what evidence therefore could he come before the Court; if they got the first verdict by forgery, they would have kept that verdict by perjury; and Mr. Crossley would have found himself in a situation to make an affidavit, that would be contradicted by four men in Court, who had the bills in their power. Gentlemen, you will consider therefore the whole of this case; I am sure you will exercise your judgements, and determine impartially; I have to lament at this late hour, it should fall to me to make a reply in a case of such length; and having been in Court so early as I was, I have done it very imperfectly; but I have observed your great attention to the witnesses who have been examined, and you will have it summed up to you by the learned Judge. I entrust the case of Mr. Crossley, therefore in your hands; and when I say, I entrust his case, I also entrust his honour, his character, and his reputation in your hands: I have a right to demand for him the justice of his country, as my learned friend had on the part of the defendants; if you believe the evidence on the part of the prosecution, Mr. Crossley has a right to your verdict; his character is as dear to him as the defendants can be: all I wish for him is, that you would do to him as you would be done by; if you think he deserves redress; if you think he is an injured man, as I am conviced he is, by a foul conspiracy of these three men now before you, that you will give him that redress by your verdict. Gentlemen, I leave his cause in your hands, being fully satisfied that justice will be done.

Mr. Holloway. My Lord and Gentletlemen, would you permit me to say a few words, I must confess that after what I have heard to night, it is desirable to me that my existence might end this night; for in my life, I never heard so much before, and I hope I never shall again: I find my Counsel has omitted reading Mr. Crossley's former letter, wherein he calls me his friend, and thanks me for my attention to this perjury business; I now tell it before Mr. Crossley, that the very evening of the trial, after Lord Mansfield had expressed the words, you have heard; Mr. Crossley came to me and said, you have influence over Priddle, I feel my situation, and I fear I never shall get the better of it; we have had several meetings from the time that these papers were deposited in the hands of Mr. Lowes for Crossley's quiet and safe, from that hour till the hour I was subpoened, I never knew that Mr. Crossley was indicted;

I never told Mr. Sambridge any of the words that he has made use of; nor did I ever speak with Mappleback till I met him over the bridge, and asked him what he could have to say to me: I wish Mr. Crossley still would do me a little justice; I think Mr. Sambridge would relent of the foul story he has told, not one sylable is true, as God shall judge me.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, the three prisoners are indicted for a conspiracy, for falsly, and without probable cause to indict; and in pursuance of that conspiracy indicting and prosecuting George Crossley , for wilful and corrupt perjury: I am afraid it will not be in my power to state to you the law, and the material observations of so long a cause, with that distinctness and precision, which justice would require; but I must trust to your great attention, to supply any defects on my part, with respect to that: I will however endeavour as clearly as I can, to state to you the points of this indictment, which I conceive are necessary in point of law to be proved to your satisfaction, before you can find the prisoners, or any of them guilty of the charge. The charge is this, for conspiring (together with one John Snelling , not now upon trial) without any reasonable or probable cause to indict Mr. Crossley, for perjury, in an affidavit made for the purpose of holding John Snelling , one of the conspirators to bail, for the sum of 100 l. and for causing in consequence of that conspiracy, Mr. Crossley to be falsly and without probable cause, indicted for that offence: It is necessary in this case to prove first, that at least two of the persons contained in this indictment, are guilty of the charge; because the indictment, stating it to be the result of conspiracy and combination; the law as well as common sense, says, that the offence cannot be committed by a single person, and therefore, one person alone, cannot be convicted of a conspiracy; but I conceive the law to be, that where more persons than one are indicted for a conspiracy, though some of them are absent and not on their trial at the time; if the Jury are satisfied that any one of the prisoners at the bar, conspired either with their fellow prisoners, or with an absent person, that one may be found guilty. It is necessary to support this charge, not only that the indictment should have been founded upon insufficient ground, which it is proved to be by the acquital of Mr. Crossley; but it is necessary that the Jury should be satisfied, that at the time of confederating together, the defendants had no reasonable or probable cause to believe, that the charge was well founded at the time, though it might appear to be otherwise. If it is done corruptly, the law considers that as maliciously; whatever indictment is prosecuted against a party for any other purpose, than that of publick justice, whether personal malice or resentment, or from the corrupt purpose of making use of the weapons of the law, that is considered as a malicious prosecution: but in this particular instance of an indictment for a conspiracy to prosecute without probable cause; it is not sufficient in point of law, that even the strongest degree of malice should be clearly proved, provided the defendants can shew, that they had a probable cause for doing that which they did, even on a malicious motive; so that though you should be satisfied that the defendants were actuated by malice, or the corrupt view of acquiring money to themselves; yet if they can satisfy your minds, that they had a reasonable ground to believe themselves at the time, that Mr. Crossley was guilty of this offence, though they made a corrupt use of belief; they are not guilty of the crime charged in the present indictment: that I conceive is the state of the law on the question, you will therefore attend to the evidence as applied to that law, and observe whether all the points are made out necessary to prove this charge.

Here the learned Recorder summed up the evidence which took up two hours.

The Jury conferred a few minutes and found a verdict.



Prisoner Stephen's. I hope your Lordship will consider me; I have a mother eighty years old, and a wife and five small children.

Prisoner Holloway. I submit to the Court; I do assure your Lordship, that however I may appear culpable as I here stand; I stand the most dreadful example that ever fell to revenge, and the time is at no great distance when it will so appear; I can say, that this is the first time, that that ever my enemies can say, I was brought to trial or convicted; and, in the courts where I practiced, I never yet, I believe, had a motion made against me; if I had known the evidence that would have been preferred against me, I could have brought such evidence, some of whom would not have been strangers to your Lordship; that would have proved my innocence; I beg leave to observe, that I have laboured under a scene of oppression for some time; I have been convicted now on the evidence of Sambridge and Crossley chiefly; this is only one out of nine indictments preferred against me; bills in chancery, articles of peace; Sambridge indicted me for perjury, when I never took an oath; Mr. Sambridge arrested me for 1000 l. and never proceeded against me from that hour to this, but if I would forego an indictment against him, then he would give me a general release; last night that ever was he sent for me about making up this busisiness, and unfortunately, it did not strike me again, or I could have brought people into court that could have detected him in the falsehood, which he asserted while he stood here. My Lord, under the unhappy circumstances I now am, with an aged father to keep, and a large family; I only intreat, that your Lordship will be as mild as possible in the sentence; for here I stand; and I avow to God and man, I would rather have been capitally convicted, than to lay in prison, or to suffer any ignominious punishment, that I dare not go abroad afterwards; My Lords, circumstanced as I am, I believe it is too late to appeal to Mr. Crossley; but the money that was talked of; (for I will, at this dreadful moment, once more appeal to him the 15 l. he gave me by the note, as stated by Mr. Lowes, was strictly true, but it was fifteen pounds out of thirty, which he took from me in the moment of distress; and this letter would have proved it: with respect to Mr. Sambridge, your Lordship knows the bickerings there has been between us; he took me in execution for 160 l. and he invited me to go to supper; Crossley was there; he took me in execution again, instead of settling the matter.

Prisoner Priddle. For my own part I feel myself no way affected, for I came here with as much confidence and assurance, that we should go off, in a very little while, with great honour; but Mr. Crossley and Mr. Sambidge, whom I do not know I ever saw him before, have got the better of us; I hope your Lordship will take our sentence into consideration.

Prisoner Holloway. A man in another situation is not deprived of his bread, after he has suffered the sentence of a conviction of this kind; but the only consolation I have, is; if I out-live the punishment I have to undergo, I shall make it appear to your Lordship, how unjust and wicked a prosecution this is; how well it has been managed, the gentlemen who have managed it best know.

Court. William Priddle , Robert Holloway , and Stephen Stephens : you have been convicted after a very patient and attentive hearing of many hours; and a full examination of every circumstance on both sides, by a very cautious and attentive Jury, of an offence, in itself extremely dangerous in its nature; and perhaps that danger is aggravated by the situation in which two of you stand, as men in the profession of the law; whose talents and knowledge of their

profession, ought to have been employed to better purposes; for your profession gives you a very dangerous opportunity of ruining the innocent! The measure that justice seems to point out, would be, to inflict on you, the like punishment, which the court would have thought proper to have inflicted on the object of your malicious prosecution, if that object had been found guilty: The court will however, always remember justice with mercy; and, as a necessary consequence of the sentence, which it is the indispensable duty of the court, to pronounce upon you, in such a case as the present, may probably carry with it an additional degree of punishment to you Mr. Priddle and Mr. Holloway; therefore, the court will, in some degree, take that into consideration, as also, what has been pleaded by the other defendant Stephens: Your cases seem to be liable to no other distinction than this: That Mr. Priddle being the person immediately concerned as Attorney for Snelling, appears to have been the principal fabricator of this business, though you, Robert Holloway , and Stephen Stephens appear to have very readily followed up the plan which probably, was originally concerted by him; the sentence of the court upon you, therefore is; that you, and each of you, be fined 6 s. 8 d. and that you William Priddle be imprisoned in his Majesty's jaol of Newgate, for the term of two years; and that you, Robert Holloway , and you Stephen Stephens be imprisoned in the said gaol, for the term of eighteen months .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

N. B. This trial began at a quarter past five in the afternoon; and lasted till half past seven the next morning.

Old Bailey Proceedings supplementary material. Eleanor Kirvin.
18th April 1787
Reference Numbero17870418-1

Related Material
Eleanor Kirvin, otherwise Karavan , upon whom judgment of death had been respited at a former session, she being with quick child, and having since miscarried, was brought to the bar and execution was awarded against her,but to be staid till his Majesty's pleasure should be known
Old Bailey Proceedings punishment summary. Eleanor Kirvin.
18th April 1787
Reference Numbers17870418-1

Related Material

The Trials being ended, the Court proceeded to pass Sentence as follows:

Received Sentence of Death, 13, (viz.)

James Brown , Jacob Jonas , Margaret Wood , William Pirton , Mary Kynnes , alias Potten, Thomas Serjeant , John Deary , William Wilson , James Thompson , alias Robinson, alias Robertson, Esther Thornton , Jane Tyler , Benjamin Gregson , James Stewart .

Old Bailey Proceedings supplementary material. Eleanor Kirvin.
18th April 1787
Reference Numbers17870418-1

Related Material
Eleanor Kirvin, otherwise Karavan , upon whom judgment of death had been respited at a former session, she being with quick child, and having since miscarried, was brought to the bar and execution was awarded against her,but to be staid till his Majesty's pleasure should be known .

To be transported for seven years, 60, (viz.)

Ebenezer Sampson , Margaret Darnel , Susannah Allen , John Croker , William Bale , Thomas Dunn , Mary Green, John Kearnon , Jane Marriott , Henry Hyams , Thomas Rickarby , Alexander Wilson , William Raynor , John Ellison, William Deal , Elizabeth Holligin , Andrew Peters , Hannah Pleasant Jones (Africa), Richard Cunningham , Edward Anderson , Richard Godfrey, Ann Mather , Edward Hamilton , Catherine Smith , Peter Piper , Ann Kemp , Jane Bonner , Mary Martin , John Phillips , Henry Murray , Thomas Fairbank , James White , Jane Dundass , William Baker , William Dudney , Richard Hughes , Patrick Casey , Francis Ball , Joseph Cook , alias Wright, Adam Bell , Samuel Oliver , Thomas Baker , John Clew , John Atkinson , Benjamin Tarber , Edward Walton , alias Walkden, Thomas Larney , William Shaw , Jacob Levy , Angel Levy , Joseph Pearce , Peter Critchley , Ann Smith , Catherine Johnson , John Davis , James Price, Dennis Carty , John Davis , John Selby , Mary Carrol (Africa.)

Fined 1 s. and imprisoned twelve months in Newgate, 9, (viz.)

Ann Barrington , Robert Parker , George Ketch , Sarah Robinson , Peter Bush , Thomas Taylor , Thomas Harcourt , Mary Woslings, Hannah Lisson.

To be imprisoned six months, 1, (viz.)

Thomas Northover .

To be whipped, 4, (viz.)

William Jamison , Thomas Godfrey , Thomas Northover , John Young .

Branded, 1, (viz.)

John Isbister .

Old Bailey Proceedings advertisements.
18th April 1787
Reference Numbera17870418-1

Related Material

Trials, Arguments of Counsel, &c. taken as usual in Short Hand, by E. HODGSON, No. 35, Chancery-Lane, and No. 13, White-Lion Row, Islington. - Mr. HODGSON begs Gentlemen will send Porters to Islington, when he is wanted, and not trust to the Stage, or Penny-Post.

*** A complete SET OF SESSIONS-PAPERS, from the Year 1771 to the present Time, to be disposed of.

HODGSON'S Short-Hand Treatise, price 18 d. and his Short-Hand Contractions, price 2 s. 6 d. sold at No. 35, Chancery-Lane, and by Bladon, and all the Booksellers.

Short-Hand taught in Four Lessons, price Two Guineas.

Old Bailey Proceedings advertisements.
18th April 1787
Reference Numbera17870418-2

Related Material

Trials, Arguments of Counsel, &c. taken as usual in Short Hand, by E. HODGSON, No. 35, Chancery-Lane, and No. 13, White-Lion Row, Islington. - Mr. HODGSON begs Gentlemen will send Porters to Islington, when he is wanted, and not trust to the Stage, or Penny-Post.

*** A complete Set of SESSION PAPERS, from the Year 1771 to the present Time, to be disposed of.

HODGSON'S Short-Hand Treatise, price 18 d. and his Short-Hand Contractions, price 2 s. 6 d. sold at No. 35, Chancery-Lane, and by Bladon, and all the Booksellers.

Short-Hand taught in Four Lessons, price Two Guineas.

View as XML