Old Bailey Proceedings.
17th February 1796
Reference Number: 17960217

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
17th February 1796
Reference Numberf17960217-1

Related Material


LONDON: Printed and published by W. WILSON, No.15, St. Peter's-Hill, Little Knight-Rider-Street, Doctors' Commons.


THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery FOR THE CITY OF LONDON, &C.

BEFORE WILLIAM CURTIS , Esq. LORD MAYOR of the CITY of LONDON; the Right Honourable Sir HENRY ASHURST , Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's Court of King's Bench; Sir GILES ROOKE , Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's Court of Common Pleas; and Sir SOULDEN LAWRENCE, Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's Court of King's Bench; Sir JOHN WILLIAM ROSE , Serjeant at Law, Recorder of the said City; JOHN SILVESTER, Esq. Common-Serjeant at Law of the said City; 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.

First Middlesex Jury.

Thomas Price

Joseph Dale

William Duncomb

Joseph Naylor

William Thomas

Edward Grace

John Goodfellow

William Hopwood

Francis Denyer

Charles Pinsent

Thomas White

John Humphries

Second Middlesex Jury.

John Harper

Henry Harris

James Potts

Thomas Keys

Percy Sadler

John Pinsent

Edward Langley

John Maire

John Anderson

Thomas Alsop

James Butters

Thomas Broadhead

First London Jury.

William Holmes

Richard Martin Bird

Henry Ginger

Thomas Williams

George Gibson

Henry Rugg

William Russell

James Paine

John Kneller

Charles Richard Prickett

William Simons

* William Hales

*Mr. Hales being challenged, John Simpson and Samuel Underill served part of the time.

Second London Jury.

Richard May

Alexander Hatt

Richard Speare

Benjamin Slowcock

John Lambert

John Lyon

Thomas Barnard Cotton

John Simpson

John Bawtree

Adam Blackwell

William Lodeman

William Abdy

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-1
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine

Related Material

156. ROBERT PAMBY was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 19th of January , a hempen bag, value 1s. and a hundred weight of bread called biscuits, value 30s. the property of Thomas Davidson ,


On the 19th of January, I was sitting in the counting-house, and heard a great noise; I went out to see what it was, and it was my people pursuing this man with a bag of bread, my foreman saw him take it; his name is George Milbourne.


I am foreman to Mr. Davidson; I live at Lower Shadwell; I saw the prisoner take a bag of bread from Mr. Davidson's warehouse, there was one hundred weight of it, it is worth 30s. I went after him, and stopped him with it; one John Brydges went with me; the prisoner had it on his shoulder; we delivered him up to Mr. Forrester, the constable.

Jury. Q. What time was this? - A. About eleven O'clock in the morning, as high as could be.


I was sent for to take the prisoner into custody; I have had the property ever since. (produces it).

Davidson. This is mine, it is marked with my initials.

Prisoner's defence. I was going by Mr. Davidson's in the morning, and they called me, and asked me if I wanted work, I said, yes; when I went in, they had plenty of men, and did not want me; I stood a little while, and there came in a waterman, and asked for a bag of biscuits; I asked him if he wanted any body to carry them for him; he said, yes, he would give me threepence; and just as I had got them up, they came after me, and took me.

Court. Q. Who was it that delivered the bag to the waterman?

Prisoner. That man, Milbourne.

Milbourne. There was nobody at all came in for a bag of biscuits.


Q. Did you see the prisoner in your master's shop, on the 19th of January? - A. Yes; I saw him take the biscuits, and I ran out after him.

Q. Did any body come in for any biscuits that you saw? - A. No.

Q. Are there any other servants in your house? - A. No.

GUILTY . (Aged 23.)

Fined 1s. and discharged .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE.

Mr. Davidson. My Lord. I have reason to suppose the prisoner took this bread through necessity, he has a wife and family in extreme distress.

Court. Q. You have behaved very humanely, Sir. - Do you know what line of life he has been in? - A. No.(The prisoner said he had been in the army).

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-2
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

157. THOMAS THOMPSON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 16th of February , an eight-day table clock, value 61. the property of George Downing , Esq . in his dwelling-house .(The case was opened by Mr. Raine).


I live servant with Mr. Downing, in Hatton-Garden : On Monday last, the prisoner came to our house; Mr. Downing was at his chambers, and Mrs. Downing was out too, it was between twelve and one o'clock.

Look round, and see if you should know the man. - A. Yes; that is him, (printing to the prisoner); he knocked at the door, and I asked him from the area what he wanted; he said he wanted out clock; I said, our clock? he said, yes, your clock; I then spoke to my fellow-servant:, and desired him to go to him, and ask him what was to be done to it, for the clock went very well.

Q. You did not go to the door? - A. No.


I am footman to Mr. Downing: On Monday last I went to the door, at the desire of the last witness; the prisoner was at the door.

Q. At what time was it? - A. About ten minutes past twelve o'clock; I asked him what the clock, was to be done to, he said, it was to be cleaned.

Jury. Q. He did not ask you for the clock? - A. No; he then asked for the winder of the clock; and when I had got half way down stairs, he said, it did not signify; I told him I would fetch it; he took the clock off the Stand, put it down in the hall, and asked for a cloth to dust it; I looked into the parlour and could not find one, he said it did not signify; there was a ring at the door at the

same time; as I went to answer the door, he went out with the clock; a person was coming by and asked where the Public-office was, he said, higher up towards Holborn, when it was only next door but one, and I called the person back and directed him.


I am a pawnbroker, in Portpool-lane: On Monday last, between twelve and one O'clock, the prisoner at the bar came to my shop, with a clock, and asked me to lend him five guineas upon it; it was an eight-day table clock; he then laid down the duplicate of a coat, which I had in pledge for 8s. 6d. and desired to redeem that; I interrogated him whose clock it was; he said, it was his own; that that was his name on the dial plate, Mr. Johnson; I knew Mr. Johnson's house very well, and knew that he was a very respectable man; I asked him where he lived; he said, No. 22, Great Warner-street; I asked him if he kept a house; he said, no, he was in lodgings; I asked him if he was a single man; he said, he was a married man, but had no family; I told him I knew Mr. Johnson very well, and supposed he could have no objection to my sending for Mr. Johnson, and asking him if he had sold the clock at any time. The coat was pledged in the name of Johnson, he said it was his own; I asked him what he gave for it, he made me rather an evasive answer, and said, The clock was worth 201. I called my lad on one side, and desired him to go to the Police-office in Hatton-garden, and bring an officer. I asked him some more questions; he said, he had the clock to clean of Mr. Macklin, No. 22, Berkley-street; he said, he had sold it to Mr. Macklin, and bought it again of him second-hand, this was during the boys absence; however, I judged that the prisoner conjectured where I had sent the lad, and he immediately went out of my shop; I had the clock; I then opened a private door, pursued him and took him; I brought him back to the shop where he remained, till the officer came, who conveyed him to the office; when he was at the Magistrates, he confessed that he had it from Mr. Downing's servant, and endeavoured to prejudice Mr. Downing's servant, by saying, he had been drinking with him, and that he had given him orders to come for it.(The clerk produced in Court).


This clock is my property; I did not miss it till I saw it at the public-office; I saw it on the Monday morning when I came down stairs to breakfast.

Q. Had you given any one directions to take it away, for the purpose of cleaning? - A. No.

Q.Did you ever see him before? - A. I think he was a person that had been at work in my house, but I am not certain; I asked him the question, and he denied it.

Q.What was the value of the clock? - A. I gave nine guineas for it; I thought I had seen him before; I sent to the principal workman that I had, and they told me it was not.

Court. Q. Did you ever give the prisoner any directions to take it down to clean it? - A. Certainly not.

Q. What particular species of clock is it? - A. An eight-day table-clock.

(To Edwards). Look at that clock. - A. It has never been out of my possession since he brought it to my house.

Q.(To Smith). Is that the clock you delivered to the prisoner? - A. That is the clock.

Prisoner's defence. I was taking a pint of porter in Hatton-garden, there was a servant-man there; I told him I was not capital at new work, I used in the country to clean old work; I thought it was Mr. Downing's servant; and he told me of a place where a clock was to be cleaned; I went to the house, and I did not see the man; I thought Mr. Downing had two servants, and I asked for the clock to clean, the young man gave it to me immediately; I meant to have brought the clock back, but I was distressed at the time.(The Prosecutor recommended him to his Majesty's mercy).

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 19.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-3
VerdictNot Guilty > fault

Related Material

158. JAMES RIGGS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 9th of February , a china box, value 6d. a half-guinea, and 1s. the goods and monies of John Dummert , privily, from the person of Maria his wife .


I am the wife of John Daniel Dummert .

Q. Is your husband known by the name of John Dummert , or John Daniel Dummert? - A. He is commonly known by the name of Daniel.

Q. In common conversation, would a friend call him John or Daniel? - A. Daniel.

Then the prisoner must be acquitted; and you must go, with your witnesses, to the Grand Jury again.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-4

Related Material

159. SAMUEL HANNAT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , two pair of women's leather shoes, value 7s. the property of John Sluter .


I am a shoe-maker : On the 26th of January, I had my shop-window broke open, at No. 163, Whitecross street , between five and six in the evening; they got the shoes out of the window, and got clear off; but, on the 29th, I was out, and saw two men pass the window, it struck me they were bad chaps; it was between seven and eight o'clock; I watched them; they went, I suppose, half a dozen doors up the street, and some more joined them; they came backwards and forwards two or three times; I went and got a stick, and stood facing my own shop-window; I had not been there a quarter of a minute before they came to the window, the same window that had been cut out before; the prisoner was the foremost of them; two stood round him, and another stood under a gateway watching, but he did not see me; there was a piece of leather before the hole in the window, they pushed that away, and pulled out two pair of shoes, I saw him take them out; he immediately ran away; I struck at him, and he threw them down between my legs, and they all ran away. A young man, of the name of Lumley, pursued him, and took him, he was brought back directly; he was the least among them. I did not see his face till he was brought back; I watched him more particular than the rest, because he had a black coat on; I saw him before I went into the house for a stick; he stood right facing a doctor's shop, that I could very well perceive him, where there were three lights in the shop-window.


On the 29th of January, between seven and eight, I was coming up Whitecross-street, I saw a scuffle with three or four people; I live about two hundred yards from the prosecutor; I saw a man making a blow at somebody with a stick; I could not see who it was that struck at him, but I saw the prisoner, he was dressed in black, he ran against me, and had like to have shoved me off the pavement; the prosecutor cried out, "stop thief;" he was not more than ten or twelve yards from the window when I took him.

Q. Did he say any thing when he was taken? - A. Not a word, neither prainor con.

Prisoner's defence. I was coming down Whitecross-street, and a gentleman caught hold of me; I am not guilty of the fault that is laid to me.

GUILTY . (Aged 17.) Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE.

Court. Q. What are you? - A. I work with my father: he is a jeweller , in Maidenhead-court, Aldersgate-street.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-5
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

160. MARY HARDING , otherwise CONWAY , was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 15th of January , a cotton gown, value 10s. a duffield cloak, value 15s. and a cotton shawl, value 4s. the property of James Caffray .


I am the wife of James Caffray; my husband has been abroad three months, on board the Fly, for the Coast of Guinea: On the 15th of last month, I lost the things mentioned in the indictment; the prisoner lived in the room under me, and the knew where the tickets were; that is all I know of it.


I am a pawnbroker; I had the duplicates from the prisoner: On the 15th of January, she brought this duplicate, (producing it), to redeem the dnffield cloak, a gown, and a shawl; the took away the gown, and left the cloak and shawl behind, for 8s. 4d.; in half an hour the came and setched them out; that is all I know.


(Produces a cloak, cotton gown, and shawl). I had these things from the prisoner; the came, on the 15th of January, in the evening, and pledged them for 18s.

Mrs. Caffray. This is my gown; there is a hole in the back part of it, I tore it with a nail; I had tore the hood of the cloak, and mended it with a bit of thread; before I pawned it, the cloak cost me 16s. and I only wore it two or three times.

Prisoner's defence. On the 15th of January, this woman lived in the room over me; the came down in the morning, and asked me to hold the child while the went to receive her monthly money from her husband; when the came back, she was very much intoxicated, there were several people along with her. I work at washing for my living; I found the duplicates; I took them out on the Wednesday morning; the dined with me that day. I pawned them again for the same value.

Court. Q. How came you to pawn the things that did not belong to you? - A. I picked them up accidentally.

GUILTY . (Aged 19). Fined 1s. and imprisoned for six months .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-6
VerdictGuilty; Guilty
SentenceDeath; Death

Related Material

161. JOHN WILLIAMS and CHARLES HOPPE were indicted for burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John James , on the 28th of January , about the hour of nine in the night, and stealing, two black coats, value 4l. two cotton waistcoats, value 12s. a pair of corderoy breeches, value 20s. a pair of buckskin breaches,

value 21s. a pair of shag breeches, value 5s. two pair of velveret breeches, value 24s. three shirts, value 10s. six cotton gowns, value 4l. three mersella petticoats, value 12s. one silk petticoat, value 9s. a flannel petticoat, value 3s. two table-cloths, value 8s. two shawls, value 8s. a pair of dimity pockets, value 2s. a cotton window curtain, value 5s. four silk hat-bands, value 5s. a time-piece, value 30s. a silk cloak, value 50s. and three linen sheets, value 9s. the property of the said John James , in his dwelling-house .(The witnesses were examined apart at the request of the prisoners).


I keep the Barley-mow in New Gravel-lane, St. Paul's, Shadwell : On the 28th of January, the same day the pirates were hanged at Execution Dock, between nine and ten o'clock in the evening; we were all up; my wife had been ill a long time; we could not sleep in our own room; we had a bed in the parlour; my wife was sitting there with another woman; I was in the tap-room about my business; my wife came out, and said, three is somebody up in my room; I said, you foolish woman, how can that be, when the door is double locked; my wife and Mr. Seally went up stairs, and I followed them to the door at the foot of the stairs, and cried out murder; and I shut up my house, and bolted every door, that nobody should go in or out; I put my back against the door; my wife and Mr. Seally came tumbling down stairs, and the two prisoners at the bar; I had my back against the door; one man jumped out at the window and escaped; my wife's legs were under her upon the stairs; I kept my back against the door, till I opened it; Hoppe was the first I met with; I took him by the hair of his head, and smacked him down in the passage, and, cried out, "help;" a neighbour of mine, Mr. Leonard, was in the tap-room eating his supper off a herring; I put Hoppe in a box in the tap-room, along with Mr. Leonard, while I went after the other; he went into a long back room, but it was all fast; he could not get out, Mr. Davis went into the room after him, and he called to me; I went to him, and I caught hold of William, by his hair, the same as I did the other; that was in my long room; he told me, if I did not let him go, he would blow my brains out; a pistol dropped from him, under Mr. Sealy's feet; Mr. Sealy picket it up; it was loaded with ball; then I searched his pocket; he was resolute; then I put my knee on his breast, to keep him down; and I took a little japanned box, with a bottle of phosehorus and matches, out of his pocket, and a small chssed, and a knife with a look to it, such as they pick horses feet with; before the officer came, I secured him with a card; the cord was brought; down stairs to me, to tie his legs with; and I tied his hands with a handkerchief that was about his neck; as to Hoppe he behaved exceeding well.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Hoppe behaved exceeding well? - A. Yes; civilly, and no fire arms.

Q. How many persons were in the tap-room when you first heard the alarm? - A. There were only two women and two lodgers in the tap-room.

Q. Do you mean to say that Williams was not in the tap-room when you first heard the alarm? - A. I will swear that neither of them were.

Q. Did you not say so before the Magistrate - A. No.

Q. You are sure of that? - A. Yes; I never saw Williams in my life till I took him and tied him, to the best of my knowledge; I know Hoppe's father very well; he is a good honest man.

Court. Q. Neither of them were in your taproom? - A. Neither of them, upon my oath, to the best of my knowledge, since I have kept the house.


I am the wife of the last witness: I was fitting in the parlour, in the evening, between nine and ten o'clock; I heard a noise over my head; I took a candle and came out into the tap-room; I asked Mr. Seally to go up stairs with me; I heard a noise in my room; and he went up with me; when I got up, I saw the door open and a light in the room; I had been in the room that day before; I left it double locked, and took the key away with me in my pocket; I saw young Hoppe, in the middle of the room, packing up my things; Williams was at the drawers; and then Mr. Seally pushed before me; young Hoppe pushed Williams from the drawers; and Williams snapped a pistol at Mr. Seally and me; we were both together; they put out their light and the light that I had, and trumbled us down stairs.

Q. Who knocked the light out? - A. One of the men, but I cannot say which.

Q. Did they push Seally down stairs? - A. Yes.

Q. Were there any more men in the room besides the two prisoners? - A. Yes; one more, who made his escape out at the window.

Q. Did you see three in the room? - A. I did; I screamed out for assistance; Mr. James ordered the doors to be shut, that nobody should go in or out, till the prisoners were secured; Mr. James and Mr. Seally secured Hoppe first, and then the other; I went up stairs directly after, before they were taken away, and I found all my things packed up in a petticoat, the same as they are now, (producing them); they had been left in the drawers and boxes; the time-piece was upon the mantle piece.

Jury. Q. Were the drawers locked? - A. No.

Court. Q. Were these things your own and your husband's? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Do you know how these people had got in? - A. They had come in at the passage door, and went up stairs.

Q. Did you examine the door of your room? - A. Yes; it had been unlocked by picklock keys.

Q. At what time in the evening had you been in the room? - A. In the afternoon, before it was dark; it was in the course of the afternoon; I cannot say at what time; it might be between four and five o'clock.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. It might be an hour or two before you light candles, that you were up stairs? - A. It might.

Q. The window was not fastened when you went up stairs? - A. Yes, it was; it had not been open all day.

Q. Then it must be dark in the room? - A. No; there is a hole in the shutter.

Q. It would take some time, you know, to pack up these things; how long these persons had been there, it was impossible for you to tell? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Did you always say that Williams was up stairs? - A. Yes.

Q. Did not you say, before the Magistrate, that you could not tell whether he was or not? - A. No; I never did.

Q. A great many of these are old things? - A. Very few; they are most of them new.

Q. Hoppe behaved remarkably well? - A. He did not behave with violence.

Q. He is a lad of respectable parents? - A. I don't know.

Court. Q. How long was it dark before you heard these people? - A. It was between nine and ten o'clock.

Q. Upon the 28th of January? - A. Yes.

Q. Had it been dark two hours? - A. Yes.

Q. Can you put any value upon these things? - A. Yes; they are worth 20l.

Q.But putting a moderate value upon them? - A. I think that is under-valuing them, they were almost all new.


(Produces a pistol, a bottle of phosphorus, with matches, a chiffel, and a knife). I went up stairs with Mrs. James, and found three people in the room; they were emptying the drawers; one was handing the things to the other, to put into a petticoat, upon the floor; I attempted to pull the door to, to keep them in, and Hoppe immediately pushed the door from me, and made a rush at me; Williams put a pistol over Hoppe's shoulder and strapped it at me, it stashed in the pan; he held it about as near to me as my finger is to my forehead, (about half a yard), it blazed up as a pistol or a gun does when it goes off; they rushed down stairs, thinking to push me down the stairs; I could not see much of the one that made his escape; but these two scuffled with me, and we fell down stairs, the woman and all together, eleven or twelve stairs, without touching them with our feet; Hoppe was under me, and Williams upon me; I called out for the door to be opened, and got hold of Hoppe's coat, and delivered him to Mr. James, and with his assistance we took him to another man in the taproom, and gave him charge of him; Mr. Davis called out, in the long-room, and said, here is another; I went to his assistance; and Mr. James and Mr. Davis had got him down upon his back, on the floor; Mr. Davis then said, Mr. Seally take care, he has a pistol somewhere; I turned round, and picked up this pistol from the side of his pocket.

Q. Have you had it ever since? - A. No; I delivered it to Mr. Cook, the officer; he is not here; I went to him yesterday to setch it; I had marked it, so that I know it is the same; this phosphorus bottle was found in Williams's pocket, with matches in it, and a chissel, and this is Williams's knife, that was taken from his pocket; these two keys were found, the next morning, under a pot that they keep the liquor in to scower the pots with; I tied Williams, and confined him.

Mr. Knapp. Q. All these things were found upon Williams? - A. Yes.

Q. None upon Hoppe? - A. No, not a single thing.


I was at Mr. James's on the 28th of January, at night, I was getting my supper, and had a put of beer with the lodgers; Mrs. James said, she heard a noise over head, and asked Mr. Seally to go up stairs with her; they went up, I sat and eat my supper, till I saw Hoppe at the stair-foot door upon the ground; I took him, and held him till the officer came; I picked up a black silk cloak under the place where he was sitting, (it is produced).

Mrs. James. I know this is the cloak, because I sewed it with a piece of threat at the back part.

Q.(To Mrs. James.) Is that your cloak? - A. Yes; It was in the drawers.


On the 28th of last month, there came two women to the door, where we resort, opposite to the office, at Shadwell, and cried out, that there were some men had entered the house of the Barley-mow, and desired we would go with them; accordingly, Mr. Cooke, and Mr. Hayees, and I went there; we rapped at the door, and it was opened; the tallest man of these two, I believe his name is

Williams, was lying on his back in the passage, the other man was in the tap-room; there were a great many people in the tap-room, men and women; seeing this man secured, I made towards the man in the tap-room; I took him into custody, my brother officer brought this man out of the passage, where he had been lying, and we tied them together, and brought them to the office.


On the 28th of January, I went down to order some beer at the Barley-mow; I was talking with the landlord and Mr. Seally; the landlady came out of the back parlour, and said to Mr. Scally, I wish you would go up stairs with me, for I think I hear somebody in my room, they went up stairs, and I went to the back door; before we got there, we heard the cry of murder, thieves, stop them, we then went back to the stairs-foot door; Mr. James cried out, shut the door, the door was shut; as soon as the door was shut, Hoppe, the little short one, was let out from the stairs; there was such a noise, we thought there were a great many more than there were; while we were securing him, Williams slipped down stairs, and got into the back room, which is a long room; I said to Mr. James, when conducting the other into the tap-room, there is one gone into the backroom, and he was standing against a back door that leads into a bye street, and he said there is nobody here; Mr. James caught hold of him by the hair, and he said, if he did not let him go, he would fire; and in the scuffle, at the further end of the passage, a pistol dropped from his pocket; I told him to see, for there was a pistol, it was snapped then in the passage, and I saw the fire; I cannot say who it was did it, but Mr. Seally has told me since, it was he that snapped it himself; we searched his pocket, and found a phosphorus-box, and chiffel, knife, with a hook to it, and then we tied his hands and his legs; that is all I know.

Williams's defence. My Lord, I refer my defence to my Connsel.

Hoppe's defence. It is the first offence, and I hope for mercy; as for the prisoner Williams, he knows nothing of the robbery, and I never saw him before in my life.

For Hoppe.


I am a taylor in Houndsditch, I have known Hoppe ever since he came from the Bluccoat-school; from that time he has borne a very sober, honest, industrious character; his parents are very hard working, Industrious people; within these few months I have not known any thing of him.


I live in Houndsditch, I am in the coal-trade; I have known Hoppe, to the best of my knowledge, twenty five years.

Q. That is almost all his life; is it not? - A. Yes, before he went into the Bluecoat-school; I never heard any thing to his detriment in my life, till the present charge.

Q. Did he bear a general good character or not? - A. When he used to work at home along with his father, I never saw any thing amiss of the man; he is a tinman, and lives two doors from me.


I live in Hounsditch, about thirty yards from the prisoner's father; I have knewn him four years, or better; he has borne a very good character for any thing I ever heard; he worked with his father as a tinman, he was apprenticed to him; he was always a good lad.


I am a baker; I live next door to the prisoner's father; I have known him about twelve or fourteen years; his general character is very good; I never heard any things amiss of him before this time.

Hoppe. My Lord, the man that jumped out at the window, was the man that fired; this prisoner is an innocent man; I never saw him before in my life.

Williams, GUILTY . Death . (Aged 28.)

Hoppe, GUILTY . Death . (Aged 22.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-7
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

162. ROBERT DAGLEY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th of January , eight cotton shawls, value 16s. the property of Edward Coates .


I am a linen-draper , No. 35, Oxford-street ; On the 26th of January, I lost eight cotton shawls from within the shop-door, they were hung upon a cord; I did not see them taken, but they were brought back to my shop with the prisoner.


On the 26th of January, I was behind the counter of Mr. Coates; about six o'clock in the evening, I discovered the shawls dragging from the line on which I had placed them the same morning; I immediately got over the counter, and ran after the man; when I came to Newman-street, about thirty yards from the door, I met the watchman; I asked him if he saw any man running that way? he said he had, and he perceived him with something under his arm; he told me to cross immediately; I then got fight of him, and cried out "stop thief," and he was stopped; in bringing him back to the shop,

a pilot, who took him, shewed me the place where the shawls had been thrown; these are the shawls, I put them in a drawer, they have been in the drawer ever since. The pilot said he saw him throw them away, and directed me to the spot; the pilot is not here; he said he was a Dover pilot, and could not attend. The prisoner seemed very much confused, and said he had no shawls.

Prisoner. Q. Whether I was ever out of your sight after you cried stop theif? - A. No; he was not, till we came to the shop.

Court. Q. Did you see him throw any property away? - A. No.


On the 26th of January, going up Newman-street, with Samuel Harding , I heard the cry of"stop thief;" I turned about, and the prisoner came against me.

Q. Had he any thing upon his arm? - A. No. thing; I took hold of him, he gave me a push, and got from me again, he seemed very much agitated; I got him again, before he got a couple of yards; I then detained him till Samuel Harding and the other witnesses came up; a gentleman, who called himself a pilot, said, he saw the prisoner heave the shawls over the iron pallisadoes.

Q. The prisoner came behind you? - A. Yes.

Q.Which way did the pilot come? - A. The same way.

Prisoner. Q. In what way did I get away from you; did I use any violence? - A. No.

Q.(To Haynes.) Are those the shawls the pilot said the prisoner threw away? - A. Yes; they are Mr. Coates's property.

Contes. These are my property; they have my private mark.

Q. What is the value of them? - A. Sixteen shillings.

- GILLET sworn.

I am an assistant of Mr. Coates; I know the handkerchiefs are the property of Mr. Edward Coates, in Oxford-street; the pilot directed me to the spot were they were, and I found them.


On the 26th of January, about six in the evening, walking up Newman-street, I heard the cry of "stop thief;" I immediately turned round, and the prisoner was running, and Mr. Gillet got hold of his arm; and he got away; we followed him, and got hold of him directly, he had nothing upon him; Mr. Coates's shopman came up; and a Dover pilot said, he saw him throw the shawls away.

- HAYNES sworn.

I was standing in the shop behind the counter, and saw the handkerchiefs drawing off the line; they were within the door, and the door was open.

Prisoner's defence. There was nobody saw me have them, or throw them over the rails.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-8
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

163. ELIZABETH JOHNSON was indicted for stealing a silver watch, value 3l. a silver watch-chain, value 6s. a silver key, value 12d. and two sixpences , the property of William Birch , December the 15th .


I am a soldier in the Royal Lancashire Militia ; I got a permit of my officer to come to London for a day; I went to the White Horse in Drury-lane, to an acquaintance of mine; I came out of the door to make water; I met the prisoner and another person; they said, soldier, will you give us any thing to drink? I said, I did not care, if they would come in; we went in, and I paid for a pot of beer for them; the prisoner asked me where I had to lie? I said I was a stranger, and did not know; she said, she could get me a good bed for a shilling; I gave her a shilling, and she took me to a room; when we came into the room, she said, soldier, are we not to have something to drink? I said, I did not care; what would she have? she said, a drop of gin; and I gave her sixpence to fetch it; when the went for the first, she asked if we should have any more? I then gave her a shilling, and she gave it to the other woman; she then came by me, and snatched hold of the chain and pulled the watch out of my pocket; I made a catch at it, and got hold of the seal thinking to recover the watch, and this (producing the seal.) broke off; there were two sixpences hanging to the chain.

Q. What became of the watch? - A. She ran down stairs with it as fast as she could; I ran after her, and, at the top of the stairs, I catched at the watch, and broke the seal from it; I came back into the room to get the candle to go after her, and fell down stairs, and cut my nose.

Q. What time was this? - A. Between seven and eight o'clock; I never saw her again till Mr. Treadway, the constable, sent down to me to come up.

Q.What did you do when you had lost the watch? - A. I went immediately to Treadway the constable.

Q. How soon after was the woman taken up? - A. The last Sunday but one, this was the 15th of December; Treadway took me to several houses in Drury-lane, to see several sets of them; at one house I saw the prisoner, I knew her immediately; he

took me to two or three houses in Parker's-lane before we found her.

Q. Upon your sixing on her, she was taken into custody? - A. Yes.

Q.Look at the prisoner? - A. That is her; she said it was a pity a red bugger should ever wear a watch, the sailors ought to have them.


I am a constable, I took the prisoner; the watch was not found upon her. The prosecutor came to me, on Tuesday morning, the 16th of December, to Bow-street, to go and take a woman who had robbed him; he took me to No.7, Parker's-lane, and the woman had left the lodging and gone away; I asked him where he was to be found if I found the girl? and he gave me a direction. On Sunday week last I found her, and sent for him; I first took him to a house in King-street, Drury-lane, she was not there; I then went with him to a house in Cross-lane, she lived in the first-floor.

Q. Were you aware this was the woman before you carried him there? - A. Yes; the second house we went into we found her; there were three of them sitting at breakfast; the soldier went in and pointed her out as the person; I searched her, there was no duplicate, or any thing, found upon her; she said, how do you think I could rob you? I might as well have taken your guinea and half as the watch.

Q. She said he had a guinea and half in his pocket? - A. Yes; she said, it was some other girl that robbed him, it was not her; she said he was drunk.

Q.(To Birch.) What money had you in your pocket when you were with this woman? - A. A guinea and a half, and five shillings in silver, and five pennyworth of halfpence.

Q. Did the know you had the money? - A. No.

Q. Were you in liquor, or sober? - A. I was sober enough; I had only had two pots of beer with them.

Q. You had some gin? - A. Yes; the sixpenny-worth she went for.

Jury. Q. Why did not you lay hold of the woman when she robbed you? - A. I got hold of the watch, she got off; I went back to the table for the candle, not knowing the room, and fell down stairs.

- MUMFORD sworn.

I am a constable: I was with Treadway when he took the prisoner; she said, she might as well have taken the guinea and a half as the watch; that he had no business with a watch.

Prisoner's defence. As I was going down Drury-lane, with another young woman, this man stood at the White Horse; he asked us to go in and drink; we had several pots of beer, and rum and gin; I told the young woman, I must go; she said, she could get him a lodging, and I went away, I was afterwards coming back, and saw the prisoner lying in the street, and a crowd about him; he said, he had lost his watch; there was a soldier with him; they took a guinea and a half out of his pocket, and took him to the watch-house; I know nothing of his watch; he he came to me several times, and said, he would give me a guinea and a half if I would find his watch.

Q.(To the prosecutor.) Were you lying in the street? - A. Yes; it was with falling down stairs; I did not lay above a minute; the watchman took me to the watch-house.

Q. Why were you carried to the watch-house? - A. To take care of me; the watchman said, I might as well go there, and pay a shilling for my bed, as lay any where else; I went and lay there, and paid a shilling for a bed.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-9
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence; Guilty > lesser offence

Related Material

164. GEORGE WAKEMAN and ALEXANDER DEW were indicted for that they, on the King's highway, on the 23d of December , in and upon Charles Adam Beckman , did make an assault, putting him in fear and danger of his life, and stealing from his person, a leather pocket-book, value 2s. the property of Charles Adam Beckman , one bank note value 300l. one other bank note, value 100l. one other bank note, value 30l. and three other bank notes, each of the value of 20l. the property of Ann Salt , widow , and Charles Adam Beckman .(The witnesses were examined apart, at the request of the prisoner).(The case was opened by Mr. Fielding.)


Examined by Mr. Const. Q. Were you, on the 23d of December, at Wills's coffee-house? - A. I was; I come every day, at twelve o'clock, generally, and stay till Change is over; I go on the Change, but don't leave there till past four; I was there on that day, about half past two o'clock, and heard several gentlemen talking, especially Mr. Young, a sail-maker; I observed, round the corner, four or five people standing, when I was speaking to Mr. Young.

Don't tell us what you said to Mr. Young - A. I went out of the coffee-house, with that gentleman, directly.

Q. Did you know any thing of these persons? - A. I did.

Q. Did you see the prisoners there? - A. Yes;

the prisoner Wakeman particularly; I cannot say particularly as to the other; I am almost sure of Wakeman; I used to come to Bow-street, constantly, and sit with the Magistrate, when I had nothing to do, and have seen him there, and in the street, frequently.

Q. As to Wakeman you know him? - A. I saw his face that day.

Q. Are you sure as to his person? - A. Yes, I am; as to the other I cannot be positive, because they stood with their backs turned, at the corner, and I could not be positive.

Q. Have you any belief on the subject? - A. I do believe he was one, but I will not be positive.

Q. As to Wakeman, you have seen him at Bow-street? - A. Yes.

Q. Where have you seen the other? - A. In the street; I have seen him frequently in the street, but cannot say particularly as to him.

Q. You do not know any thing till you returned, and then you heard it from other persons? - A. I know nothing else about it.

Q. You saw them after they were taken up? - A. Yes; the next day, I believe, I am not positive; I saw them at Bow-street.

Q. And there you gave the same account you have given here? - A. Yes; I observed them at Wills's coffee-house, for a quarter of an hour, or twenty minutes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. As to Dew, you never saw his face upon that occasion, only his back? - A. No; and I am not positive it was his back.

Q. That is the only thing you can form a belief upon? - A. Yes.

Q. The room was very full at Bow-street? - A. Yes.

Q. And a lane was made for you to come and see them? - A. Yes.

Q. So that they were the only two objects you had to look at? - A. Yes.

Q. Before that, were you not told by some of the officers, that these were the people who were charged with the robbery? - A. They did.

Q. You saw them under the report that they were the persons who had done this? - A. Yes.

Q. You take upon yourself now to be positive to Wakeman? - A. I had seen his face; I am positive to him.

Q. Pray, what is your name? - A. Augustus David Whiskey.

Q. Have you always gone by that name? - A. Yes, always; I have been sixteen years in this country, and was never known by any other name.

Q. Have you ever been in prison in Poland? - A. I have been prisoner in Russia.

Q. I mean a prisoner in Poland? - A. No; no such a thing.

Q.That you are sure of? - A. Yes; I was with the confederates; and I can bring proofs from the King of Prussia, and Duke of Brunswick, that I was a gentleman bred and born.

Q.Were you never in prison, under a charge of a conspiracy to assassinate the King of Poland? - A. No.

Court. That is certainly very improper; we always pity counsel when they have such instructions.

Jury. It is certainly very foreign to the subject.

Q. Do you go by the name of Count Whiskey? - A. I believe I am entitled, as well as any one; but I always go by the name of Mr. Whiskey; I never go by any such title, though I may have that title by people that know me.

Q. What day was this; was it short of five days before you saw these people? - A. I do not know indeed.

Q. You must know whether you went to Bow-street the next day after this matter happened? - A. I cannot say.

Q. It was five days after they were taken up before you saw them? - A. I do not know whether it was or not.


Examined by Mr. Fielding. I was at Wills's coffee-house on the 23d of December; I took Mr. Beckman 490l. in bank notes, and some cash, I think a guinea and a half, and some silver; I paid it to him, and he put it in his pocket-book; we were sitting at one of the tables on the right hand side, a side window, opposite Clarke's, the stationer.

Q. Did you observe any thing yourself of any people in the house or out of the house? - A. There were several people in the house, but I did not observe who they were; I went with Mr. Beckman as far as Bank-buildings; he went towards Tom's, and I went towards Batson's, coffee-house, through into Lombard-street.


Examined by Mr. Fielding. I am a merchant , of Birmingham, in partnership with a widow lady, of the name of Ann Sah ; I was, on the 23d of December, with Mr. Colne; I received from Mr. Colne 490l. in bank notes, that I fetched from a bank in Basinghall-street; I have the numbers of them in my pocket-book, (produces a paper).

Q. You had other property about you? - A. Yes; making, in the whole, near 300l.; I put it into a red morocco pocket-book, and went across Lombard-street to pay the money.

Q. When you were so engaged in this transac

tion, did you take out your pocket book publickly? - A. Yes; I saw several people looking on; but I did not suspect any body; I put it in my left coat pocket; when I came out of the coffee-house, I crossed the street over from the Royal Exchange, to the opposite side of Cornhill, over the way, till I came to between Tom's and the Rainbow coffee-houses; there I was hustled by a number of people, four or five, or more; it was a little before three o'clock.

Q. Do you mean to say there were at least five? - A. Yes.

Q. Describe, as well as you can, the manner in which you were hustled? - A. I went along in a regular way, as all other people walk in the street, till I had passed the door of Tom's coffee-house, then I was hustled at once, in the midst of a great crowd of people.

Q. Were there any crowd before to interrupt your passage? - A. No, not all the way; then one of them gave me a very hard push, at the right hand side, and said, let us pass by, make a little room, if you can, to pass by; I looked round, to see what the matter could be; I thought it might be a horse or a cart; and I supposed it must be a pick pocket business, as several such things I had read in the news-papers; I clapped my hand upon my pocket, and immediately missed my book.

Q. At the time the people were about you, had you an opportunity of seeing the countenances of the people about you? - A. Yes; I turned myself round immediately, to see who they were, and this man that gave me a push was, I suppose, a couple of yards from me out of sight; the other people ran in order to stop him; but he was instantly out of sight; whether he went into a shop, or down Birchin-lane, I cannot tell; I turned round to see if I could lay hold of any, and they were all gone.

Q. During all that time had you seen the faces of the people, so as to enable you to speak to them again, as to make you believe you should be able to speak to them? - A. He that struck me on the arm, I could almost draw his picture, I was so certain of him; I went instantly and crossed over, facing the Exchange, to a correspondent, to whom I related the story; and soon after, I met with another, while I was talking to one Mr. Stevens, a brother to the banker, and told him I had been robbed, because I saw him at Wills's coffee-house, likewise a quarter of an hour before, who gave me a bill in the very same pocket-book, with his name in the acceptance.

Q. You communicated your misfortune to Mr. Stevens? - A. Yes; while I was doing so, a Jew boy came up and asked if I was robbed.

Q. In consequence of the boy's communication, you thought proper to take him to Bow-Street? - A. Yes, which I did; and I stopped the notes at the Bank.

Q. Have you ever heard of any of the notes since? - A. No; only one note that has been in circulation; one 30l. note.

Q. This boy gave information to the Magistrates? - A. Yes.

Q. Some officers were dispatched to particular places? - A. Yes.

Q. When was it, in consequence of any search, that the prisoners were apprehended? - A. I cannot tell how soon they were apprehended; but they were apprehended the very same evening, I believe.

Q. Did you see any body at Bow-street that evening, in consequence of their being apprehended? - A. No; it was a couple of days afterwards; as soon as the Magistrate sat, the Monday following, to the best of my recollection, I was robbed on the Wednesday.

Q. Look carefully at the prisoners, and tell the Jury upon your oath, whether you are warranted that they are the men? - A. I firmly believe, that both of them were the men, not that I can say that they took my pocket-book, but that they were two of the people that surrounded me when I was robbed.

Court. Q. Are you sure these were two of the men that surrounded you, at the time you lost your pocket-book? - A. Yes; I knew them immediately after I saw them at Bow-street.

Court. Q. Have you any doubt about it? - A. No; I don't think I can have the least doubt.

Mr. Fielding. Q. Where is this Jew boy? - A. He has been taken away for the purpose of not appearing as an evidence.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. You say, at the time you were going by, there was a crowd of people, and some two persons brushed by you, and hit you on the arm? - A. Four or five; it was only one person gave me a push on the arm.

Q. As any porter going along might do? - A. No; they seemed to be all in a crowd, and pushed close to me, so as to have an opportunity to take my pocket-book, and he spoke to me to take my attention.

Q. You were pushed as you would be in a crowd? - A. Yes, and asked to make room.

Q. There was no hurt at all done to you? - A. No; only that I could feel it.

Q. That was the only effect it had upon you to draw off your attention? - A. Yes.

Q. The person who said to you, "make way," got out of your sight entirely? - A. Yes.

Q. You say it was the Monday following you

saw these two persons at Bow-street, that is four or five days after? - A. Four days.

Q.You had never seen the persons you suppose to have robbed you, from the time the robbery was committed, till the time you saw these two people in Bow-street? - A. No; not from the hour of the robbery.

Q. I believe, before you went up stairs, you were told by the officers, that the persons were coming who had committed the robbery? - A. They told me that two such persons had been taken of the names and descriptions I had given of them.

Q. The room was very full of people when they were brought up? - A. Yes.

Q. And they were desired to make a line, that you might see the two people that stood at the bar? - A. Yes; the Justice desired them to do so.

Q. So that you saw these two persons not mixed with any others for you to pick them out? - A. No.

Q. Did you not say, or did you say, at Bow-Street, any thing further than that you believed them to be the men? - A. No.

Q. You have never seen the pocket-book, or recovered any thing lost upon that occasion? - A. No.

Court. Q. When you were before the Magistrate, had you any doubt about the persons of the men? - A. No; I had not.


Examined by Mr. Const. On Wednesday the 23d of December, information was given at Bow-street, by a Jew boy, who, I understand, has since absconded; in consequence of that, I and some more other officers went that evening in search of the parties; we took up, I believe, that night, several suspected persons.

Q. Did the person, who gave you that information, describe any particular persons? - A. Yes; he gave me the names of all the five whom I knew of course, and we apprehended the prisoners among the rest; they were searched, but nothing found upon them; we apprehended them at a public-house in Clare-street, Clare-market, kept by a man of the name of Liffet, and found them together; I had been in the house before, but they were not there then, and I thought it right to go again, which I did, a little before eight o'clock, I believe it was, and apprehended them.

Court. Q. Did you see them come in? - A. No, I did not.

Court. Q. Were they in company together, or how? - A. They were not sitting close together, they were near one another.

Q. In the same box? - A. No; I believe one sat at the fire-place, and the other in the box; I believe the house was clear, and only these two people in the house.

Q. From the information you received, you were in pursuit of others whom you did not find? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. This robbery was committed about three o'clock in the afternoon; the place you went to, in order to apprehend these persons, was at a Mr. Lisset's in Clare-market? - A. I went to a number of bad houses.

Q. But you went to Lisset's? - A. Yes.

Q. You apprehended the prisoners at the bar? - A. Yes.

Q. You searched them and found nothing upon them? - A. Nothing relative to the robbery.

Q. I believe, at the time you apprehended them, they went very quietly with you? - A. Certainly; there is no question about that.

Q. Is Macmanus with you? - A. No.

Q. Did this boy come of his own accord? - A. He came with the prisoner, I believe.

Court. Q. Was he bound over? - A. Yes, he was.

Court. (To Beckman). Q. Did this boy go with you to the Magistrate? - A. Yes, he did.

Q. Of his own accord? - A. Yes; he did not go immediately; because he had some fruit, and would not leave his basket, he has been bound over to prosecute, but is no where to be found.

Court. I shall certainly estreat the boy's recognizance; and I do it that there may be some further enquiry; the blame must lie somewhere.

Wakeman made no defence.

Dew left his defence to his Counsel.

Wakeman. GUILTY Of stealing the property , (Aged 36.) Dew. GUILTY Of stealing the property , (Aged 30.) Both transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-10
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s; Guilty > theft under 40s; Guilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

165. JOHN MILLS , THOMAS NORTH , and JOHN FRY , were indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Simpson , about the hour of one in the night of the 16th of January , and burglariously stealing a boiling copper, value 10s. a copper pot with iron handle, value 2s. two copper saucepans, value 4s. a copper stewpan, value 5s. a brass skillet, value 1s. 6d. eight live hens, value 8s. and a live cock, value 1s. the property of William Simpson .


I live at the White-house, near the Shepherd and

Shepherdess, in the parish of Shoreditch ; I left the house on the 10th of July last; I went to bed between eleven and twelve, I believe I was the last up that night; I saw to the fastenings of the doors and windows myself, they were all fast; I went to bed between eleven and twelve, and in the course of an hour, I heard a disturbance of a dog making a great noise; I had no suspicion of any body being in the house, but from the noise of the dog; I looked upon it, the tenter ground adjoining, being full of cloaths, I thought it was some strange men in the ground that were taking care of it; I got up between seven and eight in the morning, I was the first up in the house; I went out of the back door with intent to go round by the garden, and then I perceived that the window-shutter and the casement of the wash-house was wide open.

Q. Whereabouts is that wash-house; is it under the same roof with the house, or is it detached from it? - A. It is under the same roof, and it is part of the house.

Q. How late in the evening had you been in that wash-house? - A. The night before; I went between eleven and twelve to look at the fastenings before I went to bed, the windows were then fast; the next morning I looked in at the windows, and perceived that the brick-work of the copper was disturbed; I went back again in at the back door, and came through the kitchen into the wash-house, and I examined the place and found the articles in the indictment to be missing.

Q. When had you seen them there before? - A. The day before, Saturday the 16th; I missed a large copper out of the brick-work, a large copper pot and stew-pan, two copper saucepans, a brassskillet, and a brass ladle, nine live fowls, eight hens, and a cock.

Q. Were they in the wash-house? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see them again? - A. I have seen part of them at the Justices in Worship-street.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. It had been light sometime before you got up? - A. Yes.


I can only speak to the property being lost; I had seen them in the wash-house on Saturday night about ten o'clock; the dogs made a great noise between eleven and twelve o'clock at night, or about twelve; my husband was up before me in the morning.


On the 19th of January, about a quarter past eight in the morning, that furthest prisoner (Mills) came to me and asked me if I bought copper; I told him, yes; he then put his finger up to his note, and the other two men came up, with each of them I sack full; they directly went into my further shop, and emptied one of the sacks; I told them it would not suit me to buy it; it was a large copper cut in pieces, and a boiler that looked well tinned; I directly put it back again, and they went from my shop to Mr. Mason's.

Q. Did you see what was in the other shop? - A. No, I did not then; I went and informed Mr. Harper, the officer of it; we went to Mr. Mason's, and there we met with them; there were only two of them in there with the copper, North and Mills; the other man was gone round the corner of the Hackney-road; Harper asked me if there was another of them; I said, yes, there was another with another sack; and he went round the corner, and took him; Mr. Mason asked him how he came by it, and Harper and Mr. Mason put the hand-custs on them directly; I did not hear them say where they got it.

Q. Did you see the contents of the other sack then? - A. There was the remainder of the large copper in that, and a stew-pan.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. This was the 19th? - A. I believe it was; I am not certain; it was on Tuesday morning.


On Tuesday the 19th of January, the prisoner North brought this copper, to sell, to me.

Q. Did he come alone? - A. Yes; it was about half past eight o'clock in the morning; he asked, if I bought old copper; I told him, yes; he asked me, what I would give for it; I said, I could not tell till I saw it; then here it comes, says he; and took a piece out of his bag; it was part of the bottom, and part of the side of a copper, and a stew-pan that was broken; I asked him, what he wanted a pound for it; he said, eight-pence; says I, now, my friend, where did you get it; says he, at home; says I, that answer will not do for me; he said, a second time, he got it at home; I told him, that would not do for me; then, he said, he would not tell me; he turned upon his heel and went out of the shop; Mr. Harper was coming, and he stopped him; Mr. Harper desired me to take care of him; and he went out; he said, there were more of them; he went out and brought in Mills; he bid me take care of them, while he looked out for a third; he handcuffed them together, and he went and looked for the third, and then I went out, and saw him have hold of that third, with the bag upon him; as I was going towards the watch-house, with Mills and North, I saw Harper had got hold of Fry, with the bag of copper; and they were all taken to the watch-house; Fry said, it was his own, and he could bring the person he brought it of; he put the two that were handcuffed together in one cage, and Fry in another; Fry desired they

would not tell where any of us lived, and he would be damned if they could find it out without it was advertised; and they to him, desiring each other not to tell where they lived, nor where they got it.

Cross-examined by Knowlys. Q. Where were they when you heard them say this? - A. I was in the watch-house, they were in the cage.

Q. It was close by, they could see from one into the other? - A. Where I was they could not see, the door being open.

Q. You know this is a charge of burglary for breaking open a house? - A. Yes; so the people say.

Q. Was any body by, when you heard them say this, but yourself? - A. No.

Q. Do not you know there is a large reward if they are convicted? - A. I have heard there is a reward, but I don't know what for.

Q. Upon your oath have you never heard that there is a reward for house-breaking? - A. I have heard that it is 40l.

Q. Three times forty makes one hundred and twenty, you know? - A. Yes.

Q. And there was nobody by to hear this conversation but yourself? - A. No.


I am a constable of the Public-office, Worship-street: On Tuesday, the 19th of January, between eight and nine o'clock in the morning, my neighbour, Mr. Gooch, came to my house, to tell me, that there had been three men at his house offering some copper to sell that he suspected was stole; I enquired which way they went; and I went directly towards Shoreditch church; and in Mr. Mason's house, who keeps an iron shop, I saw some copper in the scale; Mr. Mason would know where they got it, before he paid for it; the man, then, was running out of doors; I was coming in at the very instant, and caught him in my arms; that was the prisoner North, the middle man; I did not stand to talk with him, but gave him in custody to the man that keeps the Ship, who is an officer, and I went round the corner of Kingsland-road, and saw the stout man, Mills, skulking round the corner; I laid hold of him, and said to him, I have got your partner, I believe, you must go with me; I took him directly to the iron shop, where North was, and sent for the man who gave me the information, to know whether that was one of the parties concerned, before I confined him; he said, he was; then I handcussed them together; and went out, to look for the other man, just by Shoreditch church gates; I saw the other man, Fry, with a black bag upon his shoulder; I asked him, what he had there; he said, why my own property; says I, I don't know that; but, says he, I can prove it to be my property, and I can prove where I bought it; then, says I, you must go with me, and prove that before the Magistrate; and I took him, and put him in the watch-house; they were all put in the watch-house, and locked up, till the Magistrate sat; I have had the things in my possession; in the bag was part of a copper, and a copper pot without a handle.

Q. What became of the copper that was at Mr. Mason's shop? - A. I had that in another bag; he and I put it into the bag, in his own shop, out of the scale; that was a part of a copper, and a stewpan.

Q. Has it been in your custody ever since? - A. Yes. (producing them).

Simpson. This is my pot, here is a piece rivetted on the side; the stew-pan is knocked to pieces in such a manner, that there is no mark I can speak to; but I believe it to be my property.

Mrs. Simpson. This is my pot; I cannot say any thing to the stew pan, it is knocked to pieces so, and there is no mark upon it.

Mr. Knowlys. (To Mrs. Simpson). What is the mark upon that pot? - A. A part of the side rivetted on.

Q. It is a pot that has been mended? - A. Yes.

Q. There is no mark of your's upon it? - A. No; it is a pot I have had in use a great many years, that makes me know it.

Q.Any person that has a pot that has seen many years service, would have it mended? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Is it a pot of the same size with that you lost? - A. It is; I have no doubt but it is mine.

Q. Was this pot loose in the brick work? - A. No; it was a fixture.


I assisted Mason and Harper, after they were taken into custody; that is all I know about it.


I went to the apartment, on Saturday, the 23d of January, of Mills, in company with Ray, another officer, belonging to the same office, between five and six in the evening, situated at No. 2, in the Causeway, Limehouse; we enquired below stairs for the name, and I found a dark lanthorn there.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. How do you know it was his apartment? - A. By the directions that Mills gave to the Magistrate; as soon as I got in the room, I found a dark lanthorn, and a bayonet was found, by Ray, and delivered to me.

- FERRIS sworn.

On Tuesday, the 19th, I searched the apartments of Fry and North; and in North's lodgings I found

this dark lanthorn with a bit of candle in it; that is all I know.

Miils' defence. On Tuesday morning I was going to Barnet; I overtook Fry and North upon the road; they had just picked up those two bundles, and told me they were going to sell it; and they asked me, if I would go and have some beer with them; that is all I know of it.

North's defence. On Tuesday morning I got up and called Fry up to go to work along with me; going along the road, we saw two bundles lay in the field, by the road, and we took them up and turned them out of the bags, and we saw it was copper, and went to the first place we came to, to sell it: the man would not buy it, and we went to the next shop and the man stopped us.

Fry's defence. We found it, going along the road to work, at Limehouse.(North called two witnesses, who gave him a good character).

Mills. GUILTY Of stealing to the value of 39s . (Aged 47.)

North. GUILTY Of stealing to the value of 39s . (Aged 19.)

Fry. GUILTY Of stealing to the value of 39s . (Aged 44.)

All three transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-11
VerdictsNot Guilty

Related Material

166. WILLIAM ASHLEY and HENRY ABBOT were indicted, the first for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , a two wheeled cart, value 40s. the property of Joseph Green , and the other for receiving the same, knowing it to have been stolen .


I am a baker , at Layton : I don't know any thing about the prisoners at the bar; I lost a cart with two wheels on the 11th of December, in the night, or the 12th, early in the morning; it stood nearly opposite my house, in a yard; I have seen the cart again, at the inn, by the office of the gentleman that gave me instructions; last Thursday was a week I advertised it.

Q. Who are those officers? - A. Griffith, and I don't know the other officer's name.

Mr. Knapp. Q. You lost your cart on the 11th of December, and did not see it again till Thursday was a week in this month? - A. Yes.


I am an officer, belonging to Lambeth-street, Whitechapel: on Wednesday, the 27th of January, I apprehended William Ashley, in Petticoat-lane, through an information I had received; I had been after him from the 22d, for different things; and on the 29th I apprehended Henry Abbot , under a warrant, and on the same evening I found the cart at the sign of the Dolphin and Crown, Stepney; which I brought to the office, and the prosecutor came forward and proved it to be his property; I don't know any thing of the prisoners having to do with it.


I keep the Crown and Anchor at Stepney; Ashley, and Smith the accomplice, brought the cart to me, both of them together; it stood five or six weeks at my house.

Q. How long ago was it that they brought it? - A. I dare say it might be seven weeks ago, I think, I know it is somewhere thereabouts.

Q. Do you know any thing of Abbot? - A. They made use of Abbot's name to me; I have known him twenty or thirty years; and I should not have taken the cart in, but their having made use of his name; we take a number of carriages into our yard, many that come to Mr. Brewer's meeting of a Sunday; our gates are generally open from morning to night.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally, Counsel for Asbley.

Q. You tell us, that when they came to your house, they made use of the name of Abbot? - A. Yes.

Q. You don't mean that Ashley made use of this name? - A. It was the short man, Smith, that made use of his name.

Q. Do you mean to say Ashley was present? - A. I cannot say; I believe he might be gone out to buy some bread and cheese at that time; I don't recollect that he was by at that time; Smith brought the cart to the yard.

Q. Your yard is very much exposed? - A. Yes; I suppose there is an hundred carriages come sometimes of a Sunday.

Q. This cart was not concealed in your yard? - A. It was close to the gates; just within the gate.

WILLIAM SMITH (the Accomplice), sworn.

On the 11th, or 12th, of last December, Ashley and I went to Low-Layton; and we broke into an out-house belonging to a person, near the Red-lion; and we stole a parcel of fowls from there, and a coachman's box-coat, and a green baize covering of a chaise, or a chariot; we could not bring them home conveniently; we had a horse, harnessed, with us; we had looked at the cart in the day-time, and took a collar with us to put upon the horse, to put him into the cart.

Q. So you went with that intent, did you? - A. Yes; we took the cart from a carpenter's yard at Low-Layton, near the three Black-birds, below where we committed the robbery; we brought the

cart and property to town; and we out the cart into one Zorble Phillips's yard, in Petticoat-lane; he turned the cart out of his yard, and put it into Tripe's yard; he would not let it stand in his place; he said it was a stolen cart; it staid there about two days. Then Mr. Abbot, the publican, asked me if I had a mind to sell it, he would give me sixteen shillings for it; I told him I did not want it; I used to use his house; he keeps the Duke of Argyle, in Petticoat-lane.

Q.Who did he ask, you or Ashley? - A. Ashley and me were together; and he asked me in particular.

Q. Who did he offer the sixteen shillings to? - A. He told us to take it to one Prior, and give his compliments to him, at Stepney, and leave it there till he went for it.

Q. Who did he offer it to? - A. To both of us.

Q. Did Ashley say he had a share in the cart? - A. Yes; Abbot knew that Ashley and I had stolen the cart, and brought it there; he knew it was a stolen cart; we had taken the number-board off, and we told him it was a stolen cart.

Q. Had you known Abbot long before? - A. I had used his house for some months; we put it in Mr. Abbot's yard till he called for it; we both rode in it there; when we came back Abbot paid for it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. This is the first time you have made your appearance in a Court of this sort, I take it for granted? - A. I don't understand you.

Q. This is the first time you have been examined as a witness, or been at the bar of any Court? - A. No; it is not.

Q. You have been at the bar of this Court, perhaps? - A. Yes.

Q. How came you to be at the bar of this Court? A. I did not come of my own accord, I assure you.

Q. What was you brought here for? - A. For what I was cleared of.

Q. What was it for? - A. A felony; I was cleared of it.

Q. Was it for stealing any thing? - A. I was charged by a gentleman at Hammersmith, for break ing his house, not stealing any thing.

Q. Was that the only time you have been here? - A. No.

Q. What else were you here for? - A. I don't know.

Q. You have been here often, perhaps? - A. The more is my misfortune.

Q. What have you been convicted for? - A. I have not been convicted of any thing.

Q. Never? - A. I was confined six months for buying some pigeons.

Q. Perhaps you may have been on the other side of the water; you were never tried in Surry, were you? - A. Yes.

Q. What were you tried in Surry for? - A. A thing I was not guilty of.

Q.What was the charge against you? - A. For burglary, I believe.

Q. How may times have you been charged in Surry? - A. Only that once.

Q. Are there any other things you can remember; how many times have you been in custody in your life? - A. Not above half a-dozen.

Q. How many times have you had the good fortune to escape? - A. I don't know.

Q. How many times have you been convicted? - A. Only once.

Mr. Ally. Q. Is not there a woman, of the name of Smith, lives with you? - A. No woman in particular lives with me now.

Q. How long is it since there has? - A. Within these three or four weeks.

Q. She was not your wife, I take it for granted. Do you know the prisoner? - A. Yes.

Q. He was unfortunate enough to take lodgings at your house? - A. Yes.

Q. This good lady does not live with you now? - A. She could not live with me in prison.

Q. Now and then this woman had an opportunity of going about the house, and the lodgers of coming into the place where she was? - A. I cannot answer for that; nobody had any business in my place.

Q. They had no opportunity of coming there? - A. No.

Q. You would not be jealous of any man coming to visit this lady? - A. If I had catched them there I should have paid them for their trouble.

Q. Would not you be angry, and jealous, if another man came to visit this lady? -

Court. That is certainly not a regular mode of examination.

Q. Whether or not this man, Ashley, visited this lady? - A. Not to my knowledge, he did not.

Q.Upon your oath, have you not threatened him for visiting this lady? - A. No.

Q. Have you not said, if you got him into your claws you would be up with him? - A. No; he has loaded a brace of pistols to shoot me; I have heard or it, I did not know it.

For Ashley.


My Lord, you will pardon me if I am doing wrong to speak the truth for the prisoner; against the man I have lived with as my husband; I lived seven years with this man as his wife, and did the duties of a wife; I went by his name; Ashley was a lodger of mine between four and five months.

Q. In what manner have you known Smith behave towards the prisoner at the bar? - A. I don't know any ill conduct, but when Smith and I have had any words; he has said, damn me, (pardon me, my Lord, for repeating the oath), he would do for him if he got him in his power. The prisoner Ashley has often saved my life, by taking my part against Smith.

Court. You have lived with Smith as your husband? - A. He drawed me away before I was sixteen; when Ashley first lodged with us, I believe he worked in Falcon-square; he has cut his hand, and been unable to work for these six weeks.

Q. Was there any intimacy between Ashley and Smith? - A. Ashley never was in the house from morning to night.

Q. Were they out together of a night? - A. He was never out of a night, in general; I never knew him out but two nights, and then I knew where he was.

Q. You never knew them out together? - A. Never; unless I was out with them, taking a walk.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-12

Related Material

167. WILLIAM ASHLEY was indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling house of Thomas Penn , about the hour of one in the night of the 26th of January , and burglariously stealing a silver flat candlestick, value 7s. a silver goblet, value 14s. six silver tea-spoons, value 9s. two silver table-spoons, value 20s. two silver salt-spoons, value 3s. three silver castor-ladles, value 6s. a pair of silver sugar-tongs, value 2s. a punch-ladle, value 10s. a silver marrow-spoon, value 10s. a box containing sixty pieces of silver coin, value 40s. and eleven yards of blue striped silk, value 55s. a kerseymere coat, value 10s. a white calico gown, value 6s. a man's hat, value 2s. and a wooden tea-caddie, value 4s. the property of the said Thomas, in his dwelling-house .


I live at Stoke-Newington .

Q. Do you keep a house there? - A. Yes: On the 27th of January, we discovered that the house was broke into through the cellar-window, by wrenching out an iron bar; there was a lattice before the window; I was not in the cellar the night before, but I saw the lattice safe the night before.

Q. They could not undo the iron bar without taking away the lattice? - A. No, it could not; I am certain the lattice was safe over night; my servant maid found the house broke open, about seven in the morning, and came and called me, and I got up directly I missed the things mentioned in the indictment, and many more.

Q. When had you seen them before this? - A. I saw the candlestick after ten o'clock on the night of the 26th; the tumbler, I believe, I had at dinner, I don't know that I had it at supper; the candlestick and goblet were shewn to me by an officer belonging to the office in Lambeth-street, Whitechapel, in the office.

Q. What day was that? - A. The Friday after, the 26th was on the Tuesday.

Q. Do you know the candlestick and goblet to be your's? - A. I am certain of it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You don't fasten your own windows? - A. That window never was fastened more than it was that night.

Q. You found the house broke open on the 27th? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see the house fastened over night? - A. No.

Q. Are you in business? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you any partner? - A. Yes, one; but he does not live in the house with me.

Q. Has he any share in the property of your house? - A. Certainly not.


I am servant to Mr. Penn, at Stoke Newington.

Q. What time did you go to bed on the 26th of January? - A. About eleven o'clock in the evening.

Q. How was the cellar window fast? - A. There is no fastening to it; there was an iron bar and an iron wire over the top.

Q. Was there any lattice besides? - A. No; no lattice at all.

Q.(To Mr. Penn). When you spoke of the lattice, did you mean the iron wire? - A. Yes.

Q.(To England). Was that safe on the 26th? - A. Yes; it was all safe; the doors fast, and the bells put up.

Q. Was the cellar fast over night? - A. it was all very safe when I went to bed at eleven oclock at night.

Q. Was there any glass to the window? - A. Yes; a casement; the iron wire was to protect the glass.

Q. What time did you get up in the morning? - A. About a quarter before seven o'clock; when I came down stairs, about a quarter before seven, I found the wind blew very much; both the doors were open, and the window taken down.

Q. What doors? - A. The door that went out of the kitchen and went up stairs; the iron bar of the window was taken down, and the window taken away; the wire was not taken down, but turned up; I thought there was somebody in the house, and went and called my master, and we came down together.

Jury. Q. Were there any tracks of a man's foot? - A. Yes, coming in and going out; there were a great many tracks.

Q. Was the bottom of the area paved? - A. No.

Q. Did there appear to have been more than one foot? - A. There appeared to be two persons feet in the area.

Q.Was there any difference in the size of the feet? - A. One was smaller than the other.

Q.(To Mr. Penn). Did you, when you were called up, observe any track? - A. The border of the garden was trampled a great deal.

Q. Was there the track of more than one person? - A. Certainly.


I am an officer belonging to Lambeth-street: On Wednesday, the 27th of January, I had an information against Ashley; I was informed he was at a public-house in Petticoat-lane; I went, in company with Foredum, in search of him; going up Petticoat-lane, I met Ashley; we took him into custody, and brought him down to the office; there I searched him; in his pocket I found this silver candlestick, and this silver half pint tumbler in his coat pocket; upon a little further enquiry, we found the gentleman that had lost them, Mr. Penn; he came forward, and proved them to be his property.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. I believe the things were wrapped up in a handkerchief? - A. Yes; the same handkerchief is about them now.

Q. Did you find a snuff-box upon him, Yes; he said the snuff-box was his.

Q. Did he tell you what he was going to do with it? - A. No.

(To Mr. Penn). Look at those things. - A. These are both my property; the snuff-box is not mine; they have my marks upon them; there is my crest upon the candlestick; and the initials of my name at the bottom of the tumbler.

Q.(To Grissith). What time did you take him? - A. At half past twelve o'clock in the day of the 27th.

Court. Gentlemen, I understand you have already determined that the accomplice is unworthy of credit.

Jury. We have.

Court. I shall not call him.

Prisoner's defence. I lodged at Smith's: On Wednesday morning, he asked me if I would stop to breakfast, which I did; he said he wanted a box made the same as I had got; he said, my father has left me some silver; it was in a handkerchief; he wanted me to sell it for him, I refused to take it; I said, he might take it himself; he forced the handkerchief into my pocket; I did not know what it was; I was going with the box; I have a witness to prove I had it of him.

For the Prisoner.


Q. You know the prisoner at the bar, and that Smith, who has been already in court? - A. Yes.

Q. You know that man has accused the prisoner of this offence? - A. I do.

Q. Do you recollect seeing any thing, and when given to the prisoner at the bar? - A. To the best of my recollection it was this day three weeks; it was on the Wednesday in the morning, between the hours of nine and ten, Smith asked Ashley if he would go to London with him; we lived at Bethnalgreen; Ashley answered him, yes.

Q. Did you live with Smith? - A. Yes.

Q. What time did you go to bed that night? - A. About ten o'clock; I never saw Smith from three o'clock on Tuesday afternoon till the next morning.

Q. What occurred in the morning? - A. He asked Ashley if he would go to London with him; he said yes.

Q. Was Ashley at home that night? - A. He came home about eleven o'clock on Tuesday night as he was taken into custody on the Wednesday; Smith asked me to give him a clean pocket handkerchief; if this is it, it has had three letters picked out of the corner, (looks at it); this is the handkerchief, here are the letters partly picked out.

Jury. What were the letters? - A. I cannot recollect what the letters were, though I had the picking of them out; I think one of them was a D.

Jury. (Look at the handkerchief.)There are no letters picked out of it.

Q.(To Mr. Penn). Do you know the handkerchief? - A. I think I do.

Dixon. That is the corner; I do think that is the handkerchief; I should not chuse to swear it.

Jury. There does not appear to have been any letters picked out; she has a fine eye if she can discover it.

Dixon. It was the pattern of that handkerchief, there were three letters picked out of the corner; Mr. Smith gave me the handkerchief about a fortnight before he was taken into custody.

Q. The handkerchief came originally from Smith? - A. Yes; Smith gave me a handkerchief, and desired me to pick the letters out.

Q. Tell us what it was you saw given by Smith to the prisoner? - A. When I gave him the handkerchief, he put a little quantity of something into it; I cannot say it was this, it was about this bulk; he asked Ashley to put it in his pocket, he said no,

he would carry it in his hand, and Smith turned him round, and I saw him put it into his pocket; what it was I don't know, for I did not see it.

Court. What are you? - A. I have lived with this man, Smith; turned of seven years.

Q. He is a notorious thief? - A. I am sorry to say he gets his bread in an unaccountable manner; I never knew what he did; I said he should never bring things into the house not come honestly by.

Q. Ashley and he agreed very well? - A. Ashley lodged in the house five months.

Q. You continue in that line of life now? - A. The way I maintain myself since he has been in prison, is by parting with things to keep him and me; I never mean to enter a home with him any more; if I do, I believe I shall come to an untimely death.

Prosecutor. I believe this is my handkerchief; I have some of the same pattern.


I live at No.17, Christopher's alley, Moor-fields; I am a hot-presser; I am one of the beadles of Shoreditch parish; I have known the prisoner sixteen or eighteen years; he is a hot-presser; I worked with him when he was an apprentice; I never knew any thing bad of him in my life.

Jury. We wish to hear what Smith has to say.

WILLIAM SMITH (the accomplice) sworn.

Ashley and I went to Newington, and broke a house open in Newington town.

Q. Was there any body else with you? - A. Nobody but our two selves.

Q. What time did you break it open? - A. Between twelve and one; the watchman went one when we were in the house; we took a quantity of plate and some wearing-apparel, and brought it home to our house.

Q. What did you do with it? - A. Ashley took and sold it, I believe; I have never seen any of it, but what was found on Ashley.

Q. What time did you return home in the morning? - A. Between three and four o'clock.

Q.Where was Mrs. Smith? - A. In bed, when we brought it home into the bed-room.

Q. Did she see it? - A. Yes.

Jury. Q. Did you both go into the house? - A. I went into the house, Ashley could not get quite in.

Q. How did you break in? - A. At the back window; we took up a lattice, and pulled up an iron bar.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You and the prisoner broke open this house? - A. Yes.

Q. You have broke open a good many houses before this? - A. Yes.

Q. You are not ignorant of the consequence of breaking open a house, if you can prosecute a person for it? - A. I stood the same chance as him.

Q. Do not you know there is an emolument for prosecuting a house-breaker? - A. I don't understand you.

Q. Upon your oath, have you not heard that there is a reward for prosecuting a burglary?

Court. There is no reward for accomplices.

Q. You never heard there was a reward for prosecuting a burglary? - A. I have heard the officers have a reward.

Q. You did not remember that before? - A. I did not understand you.

Q. Have there not been several men hanged upon your evidence? - A. There have been three hanged.

Q. Did you know Edward White ? - A. I was apprenticed to him.

Q. Poor Billy Jenkins , did you know him? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you know poor Billy Read? - A. Yes.

Q.What became of those three persons, your friends? - A. They suffered the law.

Q. You mean they were hanged, upon your information? - A. Yes.

Q. You were taken up? - A. We were all taken up.

Q. You, to save yourself, swore they committed the robbery? - A. I committed it as well as them.

Q. Poor Clinch was convicted upon your evidence? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Did you lay an information against this man? - A. No; I did not know of it till he was taken.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 35.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-13
SentenceCorporal > private whipping; Imprisonment

Related Material

168. ANN BROWN was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 5th of February , a black silk cloak, value 4s. the property of Ann Smith .

ANN SMITH sworn.

I live in Crown-court, Short's Gardens, Tottencourt-road ; I am a servant out of place; the prisoner lodged in the same house: Last Friday was a week, she went out about seven o'clock in the morning, and took my cloak with her; she pledged it for 4s.

Q. Had you desired her to pledge it? - A. No.

Q. Were you in habits of friendship with her? - A. No; she slept in the same room with me; I missed it the same day; she left her lodging that morning, and a few days after I met with her again; I asked her, what she had done with my

cloak; she told me, she had pledged it, and took me to the pawnbroker's, and there I found my cloak; she gave me no reason why she pawned it.

Q. Did you make her any promises? - A. No.

- LAMB sworn.

I am a pawnbroker: I took this cloak in of the prisoner, (producing it), in the name of Ann Brown , on the 5th of February; I lent 4s. upon it; I did not know her before.

The prisoner made no defence.

GUILTY . (Aged 26.)

Privately whipped and imprisoned a fortnight .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-14
VerdictGuilty; Guilty
SentenceDeath; Death

Related Material

168. THOMAS TABOR and JOHN TAIT were indicted for feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of James Are , about the hour of seven in the night, of the 7th of February , with intent to steal the goods in the dwelling house at that time then and there being .

(The witnesses were examined apart at the request of the prisoners).

JAMES ARE sworn.

I live at No. 6, Lower-street, Islington ; I keep the house: On Sunday, the 7th of February, a little before seven o'clock, somebody came and knocked at the door very hard, and I never answered it; and then somebody came up and put a picklock key into the door, and opened it; the two prisoners came into the house.

Q. Was the door fast? - A. Yes; it was opened by a pick-lock or false key; I heard them come in and shut the door after them; I was sitting in my shop, and one of the officers with me; they might be some space of time in the passage; and then one of them says to the other, where are the matches and tinder.

Q. Did you hear them say that? - A. Yes; and then they began to strike a light; I heard the flint strike against the steel; Mr. Hudson, the officer, that I had to guard me, gave me a shove, and I shoved the bolt, so that no man could come out of the house, and none could come in; it was a bolt I had fixed on purpose.

Q. Did that secure the door at which they had come in? - A. Yes; as soon as I had done it, Hudson knocked one of them down, or both, before the other officer came out of the other room.

Q. Did he go into the passage? - A. Yes; and I went with him.

Q.Who was the other officer? - A. One Austin.

Q. When you had got into the passage, who did these two men turn out to be? - A. Those two gentlemen, (pointing to the prisoners); the other officer was concealed in a back room; and he came out with a lighted candle in one hand, and a pistol in the other, which was not discharged; and they were secured and handcuffed in the passage.

Q.Was it dark? - A. The quarters had gone half past six some time before they came into the house; it was not seven, I believe.

Q. How light was it? - A. It was very dark out of doors.

Q. Was it too dark to see their faces out of doors? - A. Yes; unless they stood against a lamp or a candle.

Q. But you could not distinguish them by the light of the heavens? - A. No.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. What shop do you keep? - A. A chandler's shop.

Q. Do you mean to swear you could not see a man's face, if you were as near him as I am? - A. Not to know any man.

Q. But could you see any man's face? - A. I could not, to see what face he had, or any thing about him.

Q. You had two officers in your house, you know; you knew, perhaps, that upon the conviction of these persons, there would be two forty pounds reward? - A. I knew nothing at all of that; if you please, I will tell you why I had the officers.

Q. I do not want to know that; did you not know that there was a 40l. reward for the conviction of persons who break into houses? - A. I did not know any such thing.

Q. Did you never hear it? - A. I never had such a thing happen to me before; I have heard that there have been such things; but I don't know any thing about it.

Q. Perhaps you know there is a reward given by the parish of Islington, for the convictions of those men? - A. Yes.

Q. How much is that? - A. I don't know.

Q. Is it 30l.? - A. I don't know.

Q. You have heard of a parliamentary reward of 40l. each, and the parish reward of 30l.; and you, you know, will be entitled to a share of it; now, upon your oath, will you take upon yourself to swear, that it was so dark you could not distinguish the person of a man? - A. It was so dark that I could not distinguish the feature; it was very cloudy.

Q. You told my Lord just now, that you had fastened the door? - A. Yes.

Q. How long before this had you fastened the door? - A. All the evening I kept it fast.

Q. How was it fastened? - A. With a lock.

Q. How many persons live in your house? - A. Only my wife and myself; my wife was gone out

to chapel; she did not come home till after this happened.

Q.After you had fastened the door, did you go out to chapel? - A. I let her out, and fastened the door after her.

Q. Did nobody else go out after that? - A. No; nor come in.

Q. How did you fasten it? - A. With a lock.

Q. After that did nobody else go out? - A. Not till after these gentlemen came in.

Q.Was there any woman, or any body else lived in your house? - A. No.

Q. Did nobody go to chapel with your wife? - A. Yes; there was a man went with her, he drank tea with us, and went out at the same time.

Q. Is that the only security to the door all the night; do you fasten it any other way than pushing it to; was it bolted? - A. No; it was upon the lock.

Q. You did not fasten it more than at any other time? - A. No.

Q.Then how do you know that it caught at that particular time, more than at any other time? - A. I am sure it was fast.

Q.Have you never found, upon the shutting the door, that it has missed the catch? - A. Never; I always try it.

Q. This door was never opened at all after you had so fastened it? - A. No; not till they broke in.

Q. Did you never open this door any time at all? - A. No.

Q. Not for above ten minutes now? - A. No.

Q. Upon your oath it never was? - A. No; it never was.

Q. Have not you said so before,at the Justice's, that after you had fastened it, it was open for above ten minutes before the prisoners were in your house? - A. Never; because it was never open from the time I fastened it after my wife, till the time the prisoners broke it open.

Court. Q. You heard them put the key into the door, did not you? - A. Yes.


I am a constable: I was at Mr. Are's on the 7th of February; as soon as ever Mrs. Are went out to chapel, the door was fastened; I tried it myself, and it was fast; she had got but a very little way from the house before somebody came and knocked at the door, very hard, and kicked with their feet, several times; then I heard somebody say, at the door, damn them, I suppose they don't serve of a Sunday; then a woman came by, I could hear her walk in pattens; the door is quite close to the edge of the pavement; in the course of a few minutes, somebody came and put pick-lock keys into the lock of the door; the door opened, and somebody came in; then they shut it; I heard one of the people that came in, ask the other for some tinder; I heard some paper rustle, and then they began to strike with the flint against the steel; the sparks began to fly very near my face; I was close to the door, close to the prisoners; there is no passage to the house, it is only a slight partition, put up of a Sunday, to separate the passage into the house from the shop; I made a motion to Mr. Are to shove a bolt that he, had contrived to keep the door from opening above five or six inches; he did not shove it the first time, and then I moved him again, he shoved it; and then I immediately began laying on with this staff upon the prisoners; one of them, in the scuffle, struck me with something, I believe a crow, that was found upon the ground afterwards; and then I struck against something very hard, like iron; and here is a dent in the truncheon that was not in it before. Austin, the other officer, was in the parlour, he came out with the light, and then we secured the prisoners; I secured Tait; I handcuffed him; and in searching him, I found this knife, it is a very dangerous knife, (produces it).

Court. There is no particularity in the knife, excepting that it has a very strong spring.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. What time in the evening was it? - A. Between half past six and seven.

Q. Have you been here before? - A. Not as an officer; I have been here, but not as an officer till now.

Q. You know, of course, there is a 40l. reward? - A. I don't know any thing of it; this is the first year I have been an officer; I have heard it, but I don't know that this has any thing to do with it.

Q. But you have heard of it? - A. Yes; I have heard that there is a 40l. reward for people breaking open houses.

Q.But they did not break into this house, did they? - A. Yes, they did; but we did not find any property upon them.

Q.Perhaps you may have heard there is a reward given by the parish, as well as 40l. upon each of these men's heads? - A. I have heard of it.

Q. What is it? - A. Twenty or thirty pounds, I don't know which.

Q. What sort of a night was this? - A. A wetnight; it had been raining all the afternoon.

Q. Day-light of course was gone? - A. It was very dark.

Q. As dark as at twelve o'clock at night? - A. It could not be much darker; it was a very wet night, and a very dull night.

Q. You are sure it was quite dark? - A. Yes.


I was at Mr. Are's; on the 7th of February, between six and seven o'clock, somebody came and

knocked at the door ready to split the door almost, it seemed to be with their feet; and then somebody came and put a pick-lock key in the door; I heard it twice; I was in a back room in the house; directly afterwards I heard somebody in the passage striking a light; then a scuffle ensued with somebody; I judged it to be Mr. Hudson; and then I came out, and saw the two prisoners on the ground; I brought out a light with me.

Jury. Q. Are you a constable? - A. Yes; I immediately secured Tabor, put the handcuffs on him, and searched him; I found in his pocket a dark lanthorn, and some tinder in a paper, and some tinder upon the ground; some matches, and a flint; and an iron crow lay between the two prisoners; these pick-lock keys, and a knife, I found in Tabor's pocket.

Q. What time was this? - A. Before they began to pick the lock, the half after six was gone; but they knocked at the door rather before that time.

Q. Was it dark? - A. It had been dark an hour; the candles were lighted at half past five; the watch was hanging just by me.

Tabor's defence. We were taking a walk round Islington fields, and went into a public-house to smoke a pipe together, and we went into this shop for some tobacco; we had no sooner touched the door than it opened; and then we were knocked down and secured; they found nothing upon me but my pocket knife, till they came to the watch-house, and there they found upon me these pick-lock keys, which I have no doubt they put into my pocket; for they make their brags, in public-houses about that neighbourhood, that they should get two forty and two thirty pounds reward, if we were convicted.

Tait's defence; We went to take a walk in Islington fields, and we went into this chandler's-shop to buy some tobacco, the door came open immediately, and there was a man knocked us both down, and said we came with intent to rob the house; he found nothing upon me but two bad shillings.

Q.(To Austin.) Where did you take these things from him? - A. I took the lanthorn from him in the passage; I rubbed him down the things; and when I came to the watch-house, I saw the pocket was made to hang quite behind, where the picklock keys were.

For the prisoners.


I am a watch-maker in Banner-street, St. Loke's; I have known the two prisoners five years, they worked for me as watch-finishers; they are very honest, industrious, sober men, as any I know; I always treated them as respectable characters, and held them in the highest esteem.


I am a watch-gilder in Old-street-road; I have worked for Tait ever since 1791; I have worked for Tabor ever since about two years ago, as a watch-gilder; I never heard any thing amiss of them in my life.


I am a fallow-chandler, in Church-street, Bethnalgreen; I have known Tait upwards of twenty years; I served my time to his father; I never heard a word against his honesty; I always supposed him an honest, industrious young fellow.


I am in the watch business; I live at No. 5, Tabernacle-square; I have known Tait about five years, he lodged with me upwards of two years, he was always very honest and industrious.


I keep a house in Charter-house-lane; I have known Tabor ever since he was seven years old; I never knew a stain upon his character in my life.


I am the wife of Henry Eshington; the prisoner Tait lodged at our house; he is a very sober industrious man.

Tabor, GUILTY . Death . (Aged 32.)

Tait, GUILTY . Death . (Aged 26.)

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-15
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

169. WILLIAM SMITH was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , a piece of calico, containing twenty-one yards, value 30s. the property of Edward Longdon Macmurdo , Francis Hickes , and Thomas Theobald .

(The witnesses were examined apart, at the request of the prisoner).

(The case was opened by Mr. Gurney).


I am a day labouring man, I work in the roads about Old-ford : On Saturday the 30th of January last, I found this piece about nine o'clock in the morning, wrapped up in a smock-frock, in a gravel-pit, adjoining to the back of Mr. Macmurde's premisses; I took them to Mr. Theobald.

Q. In consequence of any directions he gave you, what did you do? - A. I brought it back, and put it in the place I found it in; I watched from half after nine, or ten o'clock, till six the next morning; between twelve and one o'clock in the night, there came somebody and jumped into the pit, but it was so dark I could not see any body; I went over the bank, and felt about, but found nobody there; about six o'clock in the morning, Wil

liam Smith came over the bank; he said he was going to get a few turnips; he came from towards Old-Ford, about eight or ten yards from the pit.

Q.Whereabouts was he when he first saw you? - A. At the top of the bank; I was standing under the bank; he said, he was going to get a few turnips, there was no harm in that, that they did not belong to his master; he went and got the turnips and carried them home, I took the calico up again, and carried it to the counting-house; (produces it in a smock frock).

Q.Is that the frock you found it in at first? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you know the prisoner before this? - A. I have known him six or seven and twenty years.

Q. Did you know that frock at all? - A. No.


I have lived with Mr. Macmurdo about nine years; the prisoner has lived there about three months, jobbing about that ground.

Q.During any part of that time, did he work with you? - A. Yes; in general.

Q. For the last two or three days, in what part did he work? - A. Close to the drying-house.

Q. Do you recollect any piece of cotton like that hanging up in the drying-house? - A. I don't.

Q. What was the prisoner? - A. A labourer ; I was labourer with him.

Q. Did you observe any frock upon the prisoner, in the course of his work? - A. Yes.

Q.Look at that frock, and see if you know it? - A. Yes; I know it very well, it is William Smith 's frock: I know it by a great hole that commonly came on the left side, and by a different kind of stuff patched upon the shoulder; they call it fine Hessian.

Q. Are you quite sure that was his frock? - A. Yes.

Prisoner. Here is the frock I used to work in, to do dirty work.

Witness. This is not the frock, my Lord.

Jury. Q. How came you to take particular notice? - A. We mostly worked together; I have often taken notice of it.

Jury. Q. Did you ever see him wear this frock? - A. No; never in my life.

Court. Q. What makes you so positive to that frock? - A. I am certain that is the frock that he wore.

Court. Q. Will you undertake to tell the Jury, that from to day he always wore that frock? - A. This is the frock he generally wore.

Court. Q. You undertake to say, every day, that he wore that frock for three months? - A. Most days; I was sometimes called off to another job; I always took particular notice of this hole and the patch; we were mostly at work together.


I am loftsman to Mr. Macmurdo.

Look at that calico. - A. It is Mr. Macmurdo's pattern; there had been none of it sold; whenever there is a new pattern, I put them in a pile, all separate.

Q. Upon this being brought to your master's house, did you examine the cotton in the drying-house? - A. Yes; I found one piece missing.

Q. Are you sure that is your master's property? - A. Yes; the pattern was just began coming in.

Q. Did you at any time work with the prisoner? - A. No; I am quite out of the field.


I worked with the prisoner at the bar, about three months, as nigh as I can tell; he usually wore a smock frock to work in.

Q. Should you know it if you were to see it? - A. Yes; (looks at both of them); this is the one,(the frock produced by the first witness); I know it by a hole in it, and a patch upon the belly part.

Q. From your working with the prisoner, have you taken any particular notice of the frock he wore? - A. I have noticed that there was a patch, and noticed the hole.

Q. You worked with him constantly? - A. I was his foreman; I have sent him about his work, and he used to go immediately.

Jury. Q. How came you to take such particular notice of that patch? - A. I have seen him wear it.

Q. Look at that other frock, is that the one he used to wear? - A. I never noticed him with this frock at all; I don't know that it is his; this frock I know to be his, by what I told you.

Q. Look at the other, and see if there are any holes? - A. Here is a hole like it.

Prisoner. Q. Did you ever see me take any thing off the ground? - A. Never.

Jury. (To Johnson.) Q. How was that wrapped up when you found it in the gravel pit? - A. It was put in the inside of the frock, rolled up very close.


I am in partnership with Francis Hickes , and Thomas Theobald.

Q. Look at that piece of cotton, and see if you know it? - A. Yes; I know it by the pattern; it is a design that has been selected by myself, and of which none had ever been sold; this is the only piece, of this print, that has ever been out of our possession.

Q. Are there any marks upon it at present? - A. No; the name, and Excise stamp, are actually torn off; but I have no difficulty in swearing to it, because it is a design of my own.

Q. How long had the prisoner been in your service? - A. Between two and three months.

Q. In what employment was the prisoner? - A. A labouring man, or gruffer; he worked the week in which this was lost, in the drying-house; a place where this and other pieces are put, for the purposes of being finished.

Jury. Q. Did you ever observe his frock? - A. No, never.

Prisoner. Q. Did you ever see me take any thing off your premisses? - A. No, never.

Prisoner's defence. My Lord, I am not guilty of it; I never did any thing about it; I never took any thing from any body, except it was a few turnips from a field.

The prisoner called Charles Venter, who had known him ten years, and gave him a good character.


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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-16
VerdictGuilty; Not Guilty; Guilty; Not Guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate; Miscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

170. JAMES MOSTYN , MARY WINGROVE , JOHN KELLY , the elder , and JOHN KELLY , the younger , were indicted, for that they on the 16th of February , a piece of false and counterfeit copper money, made to the likeness of a good halfpenny, feloniously did coin and counterfeit .

(The witnesses were examined apart, at the request of the prisoners).


I am an officer belonging to the Public office, Worship-street: On Saturday, the 6th of February, I went with a warrant to the house of Mostyn; the prisoner, Mostyn, was sitting down at a table, I was in the kitchin part; I told him I had a warrant to search his house; I went up stairs, and on the landing-place, up one pair of stairs, I found some papers containing some counterfeit halfpence, some with the impression, and some without,(producing them) I came down immediately with them, and searched the drawers, where Mostyn and Wingrove were; in the drawers I found these two other papers, containing some blank halfpence; and another paper with some farthings that have got the impression on; the prisoners, Mostyn and Wingrove, were then secured; we then went from that house to a house where Kelly and his son were found, at No. 1, Bellalley; I had been round, and looked at the back of the house, and returned, and knocked with my feet hard; Kelly came and opened the door, he was without a hat, and a handkerchief tied round him as if he had been unwell; the lad was without a hat and coat. I told Kelly I had a warrant to search the house, and would he come and see what we did? he said, give me your names, and do what you like; I wrote the names of the five officers that were present, on a piece of paper; I told him Mostyn was in custody; and asked him had Mostyn any thing to do with that house, or came there; he said, no; there was a closet in that room where Kelly, his son, and family, were just going to dinner; it was a lower room; there was the appearance of a trapdoor in the room, in the bottom of the closet, that was pulled up, and Ray was let down into the cellar; after he had been in the cellar a few minutes, with a lighted candle, he holloaed out, "secure the people; here is the press, with a halfpenny in it." I went down afterwards, and saw a stamping-press standing, with a pair of plain dies fixed in it; not with the impression of Britannia on them, they only produce blanks; there was a box that contained some saw-dust, which is used to blacken the money: there is a person that stands by the press to feed, two pulls, and one feeds; there were four candles hanging up on a nail against the wall; there were three arched vanlts together, such as might be used for beer, or any thing else; there was a door to it with a lock and key in it, and a bolt, that any body, being inside, might bolt it; the upper part of that cellar, which was under another house, of one Bailey, a broker, was a boarded floor.

Q. The door that led to the premisses of Bailey was blocked up? - A. That door was fixed to the part of the cellar where the arch was.

Q. There was a cellar, not an arched vault, which entered into the third? - A. Yes.

Q. And within the door of that there was a bolt, by which any body might keep themselves in? - A. Any body might be in the cellar and not perceive them.

Q.Where was the press and those other things found, in the cellar or the vault? - A. In the vault there was a bench which I saw, where they might paper them up; it is in Ray's possession; there was some brown paper by it; after we had found these, I looked at the front cellar, and went up a pair of stairs and found the stair-case that leads into Mr. Bailey's shop, a broker, who is here; but against that door there were a couple of wooden spars fixed against the wall, that nobody, at Bailey's, could open that door, as it appeared to me.

Q. Did that door appear to you to be opened lately? - A. Not at all; quite to the contrary; the two spars were fixed against the wall; and the cobwebs and dust all about it; on the examination of the prisoners, when they were committed, the money was looked at; and the halfpence I found in Mostyn's house, appear to have a ridge on one side; and comparing them with the dies found in that press, there is a flaw in that die; they correspond exactly; I have them here.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You talked about the blank halfpence; they were nothing but blank pieces of copper, were not they? - A. Yes; such as I have seen in circulation, and do every day; but there were some struck with the dies.

Q. You saw Mostyn? - A. Yes.

Q. He had been reading till you went in? - A. Yes.

Q. How was he dressed? - A. As workmen in general are.

Q. There was nothing particular about him? - A. No; nor the woman neither.

Q.When you went into Kelly's house, you asked Kelly, whether Mostyn used to come to that house; and he denied it? - A. Yes.

Q.Where is Mostyn's house? - A. No. 1, Ar thur-street; and the other, No. 1, Bell-Alley; they are the next ally to one another; there is no communication between the two houses.

Mr. Ally. Q. You tell us, that when you went to Kelly's house, that they opened the door, and told you, that if you would give your names, you should be admitted to see what you pleased? - A. Yes.

Q. Pray what kind of cellar is this; what may be the depth from the floor of the room to the ground of the cellar, into which you afterwards went? - A. I dare say, between eight and nine foot; I take it more nine than short of it.

Q. Then a person being in that cellar could not, without assistance, get up into Kelly's room? - A. I got up with a chair.

Q. There were three doors; the trap-door, through which you got into the cellar, another from the street, and another from Bailey's? - A. No; whatever communication from the street, must come through Bailey's shop, by taking up some part of the window in his shop.

Q. There was no other communication than that you saw, through Kelly's, and through the shop? - A. I searched attentively and could find none.

Q.These vaults run under other houses? - A. Yes.

Q. What size was this machine with which the dies were struck? - A. It is here.

Q. What was the width of the trap-door? - A. Two foot.

Q. How did you get the machine up, could it have been introduced in at the trap-door? - A. Yes.

Q. You did not bring it through that way? - A. No; because we had a coach brought to the door, and came through the broker's shop; the house was up an alley.

Court. Q. Were there any stairs from this trapdoor to the cellar? - A. None.

Q. But there were stairs to the broker's shop? - A. After I had got possession of the tools, with my candle, I went to the further end of the cellar, and found it boarded, not arched; I then went round through the street into Bailey's shop, and asked, who had the key of that door, (the door that was sparred); and they said, one Myers; I came to the further end of the cellar, with a sledge hammer, and he came and removed his goods.

Q.It must have been some trouble to open the door going into that shop? - A. Yes; with a hammer.

Q. There was no trouble the other way, and you chose that troublesome way? - A. The stock of the press is a very heavy piece of iron, and we chose that for the most convenient way.

Q.Those bits of copper, that you found in Kelly's, were not stamped? - A. Ray has them here.

Q. They were not stamped? - A. There were some stamped.

Q. I understand you to say, that only those found in Mostyn's house were stamped? - A. I said, there were some found but I did not compare them.

Q. Was there any boarding over this trap-door, which went into the cellar? - A. Yes; three boards nailed up.

Q. It was so covered that you did not discover it at first? - A. We knew it was.


I went, on the 6th of February last, to Mostyn's house; in the cellar, we found an edging tool, (producing it); it was nailed to a block; I found a little emery, and a saw, that was all.

Q. Was that block fixed? - A. Yes.

Mr. Knapp. Q. You know the prisoner Mostyn is a hatter, don't you? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever know that that was used in the hatting business? - A. Not that I know of.

Q. This block was not fixed? - A. This was fixed to the block.


I am an officer: I went, on the 6th of February, to Mostyn's house, with my brother officers; Mostyn was sitting at the table; he had been reading; I secured the prisoner, and searched his pockets, and found these two papers; I stood over him all the time they were searching that house, and part of the time they were searching the other, (produces them).

Q. Did you find any thing else? - A. No; then I went to Kelly's house.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. Were you in the closet in Kelly's house? - A. I saw the place where Ray and the other officers went down; but I did not go down myself.

Q. Was this closet very dark? - A. No; not when the door was open.

Q. But in such a way, that persons coming to take lodgings, might not have discovered it? - A. No; if the door was fast.

Court. Q. Where was this closet? - A. At the further end of the room, as we went in at the door, by a back window.

Court. Q. It was a closet that opened into the room? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Was it locked? - A. No.

Q. Was the door of the closet obvious to people's view? - A. Yes; young Kelly's hands were pretty dirty, as if he had been at work; the other officers were there before me.

JOHN RAY sworn.

I went to Kelly's house, with Armstrong, Harper and Blackiter; I went to the back part of the house and heard a knocking; I said to Armstrong, they were knocking something to pieces, the curtain was not drawn quite close; I heard the knocking cease, and saw Kelly, the father, come out of a place on the outside of the house that looked like a closet; that closet was level with the back window; we could not get in at the back door, we knocked there.

Q. Had Kelly any thing in his hand? - A. Not that I observed; I went round to the front door, and there we got in; we went to the closet in the lower room, out of which I saw Kelly come; I went to this closet with Armstrong, we looked, and there was a hole about two foot square; the boards were cut, and a door pulled up; at one corner of it there was a new nail stuck in it, drove within a quarter of an inch of the head; I pulled it up and let myself drop into the cellar; Armstrong gave me a candle; the moment I dropped through this hole, there was a door open, and there were three large arches covered with brick; I looked in the first and saw nothing; I went into the middle one, and at the further end of it I saw a press fixed; I returned to the hole where I got down, and informed Armstrong that every thing was right, there was a press and every thing for coining in the cellar; Blackiter and Armstrong came down to me; these are the dies that were fixed in the press, there is a very particular mark in one of the dies.

Court. Let the Jury look at it, and compare it with the mark in the halfpence.

Ray. This halfpenny I found between the dies; all the things that I found in the cellar are here; I found a great many halfpence there, (producing them); I found a pair of trowsers, a jacket, and a bed-gown, and some bags with saw-dust, and sieves, they are all here; a paper of brimstone; I went the same evening again, and examined the situation of the premisses; the cellar is a very long one, it formerly belonged to a public-house, there is a flap in the street where the beer was let down, and another door that goes down a dozen stairs, but that is so barracaded with wood, that it is impossible for any body that lives in the front house to go down; Mr. Bailey, a broker, lives in the front house; then you go down fifteen or sixteen yards, and then a door opens that lets you into these three vaults; they are about twelve or fourteen yards in length, each of them; in one them there was a deep hole dug, where there was a great deal of water; there is no communication at all that I could see, but through this cellar, no way in the world.

Q. Did you look at the prisoner Kelly's hands? - A. No.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. All that you have been relating is with respect to Kelly's house? - A. Yes.

Q.Mostyn was not by? - A. No.

Mr. Ally. Q. I understand you that this trapdoor was nailed down? - A. A new nail stuck in it, but not drove quite down.

Q. And a cellar communicates? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how long Kelly had lived in this house? - A. No.

Court. Q. The door was open? - A. Yes.


I went with the other officer to the prisoner Kelly's house, young Kelly was standing with his coat off; I looked at his hands, they were all black and greasy; I did not observe the elder Kelly.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. He told you, I believe, that he had been cleaning shoes? - A. Yes; but I am sure it was not that; I did not see any shoes.

Q.(To Armstrong.) Look at all these implements produced by the other witnesses, and see what is the use of them; I believe you have had a great deal of experience in the coining business? - A. This is an edging engine, this is to round the edges; I have been at the apprehending of many coiners; I have always seen such as these.

Mr. Knapp. That was found in Mostyn's house; that would not coin of itself without something else? - A. No; this is a stamping-press; here is a sieve; that when the halfpence, or money is coined, they fist it to get the saw-dust from it, and this is handier than a wire one; the saw-dust is mixed with oil to make them greasy, for they are boiled in brimstone; it puts a greasy black upon them, to make them better for circulation, it takes off the newness; this cross bar is a fly, a couple of weights are fixed at each end for farthings, it is lighter than the other; this is the fly, one seeds it, sitting in a chair, and two pull it round, and it receives the impression, either plain or whatever the dye is engraved

with; this is fixed in a large piece of wood in a cellar, and then nothing can be heard but a jarring found, the earth keeps any person from hearing it; it flies downward, and here the dye is placed.

Q. Are you able to say, from your experience, that these implements, found in Kelly's house, were complete for coining halfpence? - A. They will make plain halfpence, or with a stamp.

Q. Look at the halfpence, those found at Mostyn's, and those found at Kelly's? - A. They are all counterfeit.

Mr. Knapp. Q. All those things found in Kelly's house, are compleat for coining? - A. Yes.

Q. What you found in Mostyn's house, could not be? - A. No.

Mr. Ally. Q. Button-cutters make use of the same kind of presses? - A. I have seen them worked by the hand by women, it is too heavy a press for making buttons; besides, they generally work for buttons in garrets, not cellars.

Court. Q. What quantity of halfpence were found at Mostyn's? - A. Six papers; some stamped and some unstamped; some that are stamped appear of the date 1775; there are six papers, each containing 1l. 10s.

Court. Q. Do any of those found at Mostyn's appear to have the flaw of the die found at Kelly's? - A. Yes.

Q. How many? - A. A great quantity; but I cannot ascertain, without it was counted.

Mr. Knapp. Q. There were some that had not that flaw? - A. Yes.

Q. They were all tied up in separate papers? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Can you say, by looking at a piece of copper, whether it has been passed under the edging tool or not? - A. Yes.

Look at those found at Mostyn's. - A. Yes; they have all passed under the edging tool.

Court. Q. Look at some of those found at Kelly's, and see whether they have been under the edging tool? - A. Here are four of them that appear not to have been under the edging tool; the greater part of them have.

Q. They are always passed under the edging tool before they are fit to circulate? - A. Generally, because they don't go so well; they are not reckoned finished, some call it rounding, and some edging; here are some that were found down with the press, and these have never been edged.

Mostyn's defence. When the officers came into our house, I was reading over a book, and they asked me my name; I told them; they asked what I was; I said, a hatter; they went up stairs, and on the landing-place, I believe, they found these things; and then they went down stairs, and said, there was nothing there, only that block and that machine; and they took them away, and took me into custody; there is no communication between my house and Mr. Kelly's; that is all I know; the things were there, and they were left there by somebody.

Kelly, the elder's, defence. Our premisses are seventy or eighty feet long; the front comes into Goswell-street, and the cellar runs under four houses; the next evidence, though he is against me, will prove, one of his children had like to have broke his neck down there; there are a great many communications; I am told it was a bad house before I came to it; these gentlemen, you know very well, swear for gain; they must get something by it; and when it is so; if they can swear a man's life away, and foul to, it is done; the man that is to come in next has been much urged against us; the Justice exposed him to us, or we did not know it; my son is apprenticed to me; I am a cabinet-maker; he is as innocent as the child unborn; I am a freeman of the city of London; he is only fifteen years old.

Kelly, the younger's, defence. I know nothing about it; I know the hole was there before we came there.

Court. (To Mostyn). Q. Whether you mean to give any account of these things found in your house? - A. The engine has been left there by a person that desired me to take care of it; and the block to these halfpence was behind the door; they were left there; I did not know they were there.(The prisoner Kelly called two witnesses, who gave him a good character.)(The prisoner Mostyn called three witnesses, who gave him a good character).

Mostyn, GUILTY . (Aged 36.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned in Newgate one year .

Wingrove, NOT GUILTY .

Kelly, the elder, GUILTY . (Aged 47.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned in Newgate one year .

Kelly, the younger, NOT GUILTY .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-17
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

171. JOHN BARNETT and ISAAC MOLLOY were indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Ward , about the hour of ten in the night of the 29th of January , with intent to steal the goods in the dwelling-house at that time then and there being .

(The witnesses were examined apart).


I live in East Smithfield ; On the 29th of January, about half past nine o'clock, I was at the

watch-house, upon duty; when the prisoners were brought to me, at the watch-house, charged with breaking my shop windows; that is all I know about it.


On the 29th of January, I saw the prisoners cut or break the glass of Mr. Ward's window, with some instrument or other; I went into the shop to see what they were doing, and I saw the glass that was broke, and some halfpence and farthings lying under it; they had not got the piece out then.

Q. In what part of the house was it that this glass was so broke? - A. The shop is in the front of the street; after I had been in and seen what they were doing, I came out, and passed them; I walked up the street about twenty yards; I crossed the street, and came down the other side; just as I got against them, I saw them take the piece of glass out; and one put his hand into the hole; but I could not see which; I saw his fingers in; but I did not see him take any thing out; I saw it afterwards; and put my hand into it.

Q. Was there any thing within reach of the persons, if they tried? - A. There was about five or six shillings-worth of halfpence lay just under the hole, that any body might reach it with their hand.

Q.How came they to leave off the attempt? - A. I believe I took them before they had the opportunity; they began to cut the place larger; I thought myself not capable of taking them, and I went to Mr.Hill's, the next door but one, to get a man to assist me; he stood about ten yards from me, while I took them both by the collar, and then he came and laid hold of one them; one of their hands was part of the way in at the window, at the time I laid hold of them; but they stood so close together, I could not tell which of them it was; the other witness can tell; we took them to the watch-house that night, and the next morning they were taken before the Magistrate in Lambeth-street.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. I believe, when you were at the Justices, the two men were offered to go as soldiers? - A. I believe there was something mentioned.

Q. The Justices thought they were proper objects to serve his Majesty? - A. I did not hear the Magistrates offer it; I believe it was one of the clerks.

Q. This was between nine and ten at night? - A. Yes.

Q. How far were you from this house? - A. I live next door to it.

Q. There were some halfpence near? - A. Yes.

Q. So near that they might have laid hold of those halfpence, if they had thought fit? - A. Yes.

Q. That they did not do? - A. I cannot say whether they did or not.

Q. Were you present when they were searched? - A. Yes; five pennyworth of halfpence were found upon one, and a knife; and, I think, to the best of my recollection, 3s. 6d.

Q. There were no implements of house-breaking found upon them? - A. No; only a knife.

Q. But no crow, or any thing of that sort? - A. No.

Q. You have a knife yourself; I dare say every body has? - A. Yes; I have one now.

Court. Q. How was it broke? - A. It was broke, by some instrument drove in between the putty and the glass.

Mr. Knapp. Q. There was no diamond found upon them? - A. No.

Q. You know that there is a reward in this case? - A. I don't do such things for reward.

Q.You have heard of such a thing as a reward for each of them? - A. I have; but I did not do it for that.


When I came out of my master's house, I saw one of them with his hand in the hole of the window; the last witness got hold of one, and I got hold of the other; and we took them to the watch-house; Molloy offered to pay for the window, if we would not keep him in the watch-house.

Q. Did you observe the hole of the glass, where it was broke? - A. About half of the glass was broke.

Q.Was it big enough for a man's hand to go in? - A. I cannot say.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You don't know, whether the pane broke was large enough to admit a man's hand? - A. No.

- AINSLEY sworn.

On the 29th of January, I was in the watch-house; I am the keeper of the watch-house; the two prisoners were brought to me, and given charge of; I asked what the charge was; they told me, they had been cutting windows at Mr. Ward's.

Q. Who told you that? - A. Taylor and Harrop; with that, I searched the prisoners immediately, and found five pennyworth of halfpence upon one and a knife; and I searched the other, Molloy, and found 3s. 6d. in his pocket, and a knife; so that there were two knives between the two; Molloy said immediately, I will pay for the window, if you won't detain me.

Q.This was about nine o'clock? - A. It was a little before ten when they were brought to me.

Q. Had you any curiosity to go and see the win

dow? - A. Not directly; I went that way home, and saw it.

Q. How was it broke? - A. There was a piece out big enough to put one's hand in.

Jury. Q. Was the putty removed from the window? - A. Yes; and there was the mark of it on the knife.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You saw the window afterwards? - A. Yes.

Q. Did it appear as if it had been broke before and mended with putty, or was it a whole pane? - A. No; it had been broke before, and puttied across, but it was cut nearer the frame.

Q. You had an intention to discharge them? - A. No; I said, it could not be.

Q. This window had been broke and puttied? - A. It had been broke across, but the piece did not appear to have been out, but the putty was put to keep it whole.

Barnett's defence. I was going along, and a man bid another man lay hold of me, and said he would bring another; he says he took the money out of both of our pockets; it was all taken out of mine; the prosecutor said, before the Justice, that the window was broke before.

Molloy's defence. I was coming by the place, a man laid hold of me, and took me into the shop, and asked if the man had lost any thing; he said no; but the window was broke.(The prisoner, Molloy, called four witnesses, who gave him a good character).(The prisoner, Barnett, called three witnesses, who gave him a good character).

Both Not GUILTY .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-18

Related Material

172. WILLIAM BELDHAM was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 22d of January , a leather portmanteau, value 1l. two cotton night-caps, value 6d. two neckcloths, value 5s. four stocks, value 8s. five pair of silk hose, value 3l. five shifts, value 3l. 15s. a cloth night-cap, value 2s. a muslin night-cap, value 3s. three muslin caps, value 15s. two silk handkerchiefs, value 5s. six muslin handkerchiefs, value 12s. two cloth aprons, value 5s. four pair of cotton stockings, value 12s. a gold pin set with stones, value 20l. a gold ring set with diamonds, value 20l. a pair of silver shoe-buckles, value 20s. and a pair of silver knee-buckles, value 10s. the property of James Baril .


I am a merchant in Winchester-street; I had been to Southampton; I returned on Friday the 27th of January.

Q. When had you seen your portmanteau last? - A. I saw it tied on the chaise near Kingston.

Q. Was there more than one portmanteau? - A. Two portmanteaus.

Q.What time of day did you leave Kingston? - A. About five o'clock.

Q.Where were they tied, to what part of the chaise? - A. The fore part.

Q. Did you see it after that? - A. I believe it was safe till we came to London-bridge; at least, I think I saw it there; when I came to Winchester-street, the first thing I heard was, that one of the portmanteaus was cut off; I think I saw it on London-bridge; I apprehend it was cut off between the bridge and Gracechurch-street ; we had a stop of about two minutes by the Monument, there I apprehend it was cut off.

Q. Who was in the chaise with you? - A. My sister, and sister's maid. I sent up immediately to Bow-street, to get an advertisement in the paper immediately, and to give a reward of ten guineas; I had information that a portmanteau was to be seen at the Justice's office, Guildhall; on the Monday I went to Guildhall, and saw the portmanteau.

Q. Was that your portmanteau? - A. Yes.


I am servant to Mr. Baril's sister: I saw both the portmanteaus strapped on safe at Kingston, about five o'clock, as near as I can guess.

Q. Where were they strapped on? - A. In front.

Q. Did you see it after that? - A. I cannot say I saw it after that, till it was missed in Winchester-street; it was strapped on with four straps, three of them were cut, the fourth strap kept the other portmanteau on.


I am a porter.

Q.Where were you on the 29th of January? - A. On a Friday evening, the day of the month I do not know, it was after six o'clock; I went from our warehouse, Old Swan-stairs, with a gentleman and lady, and three parcels, to Gracechurch-street, to get them a coach; I put the three parcels into the coach, and the lady and gentleman, and they gave the direction to go to Balsover-street, Oxford-road; I turned back towards London-bridge; I believe it was just by the Nag's-head, Hare-court, I saw a post-chaise coming up full trot; and I saw a man run to the door of the post-chaise, which I thought was open, till I saw him pull the portmanteau from before the chaise; he came on the pavement where I was, within three or four yards at furthest; when he came on the pavement, he dropped it down in the inside of his coat, and made a little running of it; I run after him, and another man came and gave me a blow on the back of my head against the shutters, I was not down; the per

son that gave me the blow, ran to the man with the portmanteau, I suppose he was not six yards from me, and he catched hold of the portmanteau, and took it away; I was in a confusion, and ran after them both; I came as far as the corner of Great Eastcheap, to turn up towards Cannon-street, it struck in my head somebody else would give me a blow, and I looked round to see if any body was coming after me, and cried out "stop thief." three or four times, very loud; and, afterwards, the men went out of my fight; I was so slurried, I followed one of the men, he went down St. Michael's-lane, I went after him; when I came there, there was a crowd, and the patroles got hold of him, and that was the person that took the portmanteau from the chaise, but it had been taken away from him by the other, in Gracechurch-street.

Q. You saw a man go up to the door of the chaise, and draw the portmanteau from under the chaise? - A. Yes; and pull it out; it was before between the wheels.

Q. Did you observe any man under the perch? - A. No; I don't know there was any body else till I received the blow.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. The person that was apprehended by the patroles, had not the portmanteau with him? - A. I was not there when he was apprehended.

Q. You say the persons, whoever they were, that went from the chaise, you followed them? - A. Yes.

Q. You had not, while you followed them, an opportunity of seeing their faces? - A. I saw his body, it was very light; he had lank hair behind.

Q. You did not see his face? - A. Yes; I saw his face when he came from the chaise.

Q. Had not you lost fight of the persons before the prisoner was taken? - A. I had not lost fight of them till I called out.

Q. Were there not a great many personsin Grace-church-street? - A. Upon my word I never counted how many there were; I was in a slurry myself; I was looking after this piece of business.

Jury. Q. How do you know that was the man that was taken? - A. I know by his cloaths he had on then; I went with him to the Compter.

Court. Q. How do you know the man that was stopped was the same man you saw at the chaise? - A. By seeing him before; I saw the gleam of his face.


I am a wine and brandy-merchant; I had just left my own counting-house; about the hour of seven, coming out of Crooked-lane, into Great-Eastcheap, I heard the cry of stop-thief; I was rather confused, but I almost run against a man with this said portmanteau upon his back, which is in court; I said, my friend, what have you got? the man made answer, damp your eyes, what is that to you; he then threw it down and ran away; I at the same time saw the prisoner at the bar near to him, he comes up directly to the portmanteau, and made use of the same expressions that were made use of by the man that ran away; he took the portmanteau, by force as it were, between him and me; he turned down Crooked-lane with it; I prusued him a very little way in Crooked-lane, he threw it down; but seeing the portmanteau in sate custody of a man I knew, I still pursued; I cried,"stop thief," for the man was gaining ground; at the corner of Crooked-lane, he turned round with a knife, I believe it was, and swore he would cut my bloody liver and lights out, and any body that came near; in that predicament I found myself embarrassed, and struck at him with a whip I had in my hand; he then ran down Miles's-lane, which is in a direct line with Crooked-lane; I still pursued, and cried, stop thief, he was met by two patroles, the corner of Three-tun-court, and was knocked down, and with difficulty we took him into custody.

Q. You are sure this is the man? - A. I am very clear this is the man that rescued the trunk.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. It was dark? - A. You can judge of that as well as me, it was near seven o'clock.

Q. Had you ever seen him before? - A. I cannot take upon me to say, I believe I have.

Q. Will you take upon you to swear this was the man you saw with the trunk? - A. I do take upon me to swear pointedly that he is.


On Friday the 22d of January, as I was sitting in my master's shop, in the evening, about seven, I heard a cry of stop thief, I ran to the door and saw the prisoner and another man; the other man had a portmanteau on his shoulder, I tried to stop him, he threw it down in the kennel, and the prisoner came and took it up; I pursued him and laid hold of his coat; I took hold of it, and cried, stop thief; he was soon surrounded, he drew a knife out of his pocket, and said, blast you, I will cut you, or any other man, what do you want with me; when I had got the portmanteau on my shoulder, Lewis came-up and said, where do you live, that is the man that took it from the chaise, the knife was picked up; I saw him draw a knife, I did not pick it up, I cannot swear that is the knife.

- sworn.

I saw the prisoner stopped, I came up to assist, and I picked up this knife, (producing it).

Mrs. Highett. That is the portmanteau I packed up at Southampton; I have the keys; there is a

smaller trunk in the inside, I have the keys of both.(The things were produced and deposed to.)

Prisoner's defence. I was coming up the street, and heard the cry of stop thief; there was a gentle man stopping a man, he dropped a portmanteau in the kennel, I picked it up, a man came up, and said what business have you with this; I said, if it was stole, I had a right to take it up, and the man struck me, and then I offered to strike again; I then went to run away, and the patrole stopped me.

GUILTY . (Aged 20.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-19
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

173. SARAH DOVE was indicted for feloniously stealing two pint pewter pots, value 1s. the property of Edward Lane , January the 21st .


I served my time to a hair-dresser: On the 21st of January, I saw the prisoner go into the house of Mitchel and Towless, in Pancras-lane, Queen-street, Cheapside , and take a pot out of the passage; it stood on the left side upon the hatch; I saw her come out, and I stopped her, and took the pot from her; I gave the pot to Mr. Lane, in Bucklersbury.

Q. What time was it? - A. A little before nine.

Q. Was any body in the passage? - A. I believe nobody but the woman.


I am a publican ; I keep the Green-man, in Bucklersbury : On the 21st of January, between eight and nine, James Mitchel ran to me and said, Mr. Lane, a woman has stole a pot of your's out of Mitchel's and Towless's; I ran out, and he gave the pot to me, he had let the woman go; he called out and said to Mr. Trueman, that woman has been robbing Mr. Lane of pots; he stopped her, and I took another pot from under her cloak.(Join Penny produced the pots, and they were deposed to by the prosecutor).

Prisoner's defence. I was in very great distress.

Prosecutor, She had an apron full of broken bottles, when I took the pot from her.

GUILTY . (Aged 70.)

(She was recommended to mercy by the jury.) Imprisoned one week .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-20

Related Material

174. JAMES PARKS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 4th of February , a silver watch, value 30s. a steel chain, value 6d. two cornelian stone seals, set in gold, value 5s. a brass watch-key, value 1d. the property of Henry Watkins .


I live in Greville-street, Hatton-garden, I am an auctioneer : On this day fortnight, the 4th of this month, I was coming down Fleet-street , and as I was passing the Globe-tavern, at half past seven in the evening, there was a scaffolding up, and a heap of rubbish round it, they were repairing and ornamenting the front; just as I had passed the end of it, there was a glare of light, I walked pretty briskly to get past, and at the end of it, tow rds the Fleet-market, I had my watch taken from my pocket, by a sudden jirk, by a well-dressed man; he went on directly; I clapped my hand to my pocket, and missed my watch, I sprang after him, and just touched his shoulder, he turned the corner, and I, endeavouring to do the same, had a violent fall, and just my ancle; I had an opportunity of seeing his face; as he took the watch, he turned as if he was going to speak to me, but it was very momentary; the prisoner at the bar appears to me to be the man, but having only that glance of him by the glare of light, and following his back, he appears to be the same, though he was very different in his dress to what he is now; he had a brown great coat; I saw obliquely his face, the corner of Salisbury-court, he ran towards Fleet-market; on the opposite side of the way; I had like to have been run over by a coach, as I believe he had; he then turned back and ran towards Salisbury-court; I will not be positive to his face; my watch was afterwards found; I went before the Magistrate the next day; a gentleman brought an advertisement of a watch found in Shoe-lane, where the prisoner was taken, to apply at No. 2, Shoe-lane; I was sitting with the Alderman, he shewed me the hand-bill, and said, Watkins, here is your watch, and he sent for the party.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You very candidly say, you cannot swear to the man? - A. The prisoner at the bar is very like the man that passed by me, and took the watch, and that I pursued; I lost sight of him in Salisbury-court, till he was taken in Shoe-lane.

Court. Q. How came he to be taken? - A. I followed him to the corner of Salisbury-court, where I was exceedingly same, and could not pursue him.

Q. Did you cry stop thief? - A. I did not, after I fell down; at first I halloa'd out stop thief, and he ran towards Shoe-lane.

Q. When he was taken, did you come up to him? - A. I did, in a few minutes.

Q. When you came up to him, what coat had he on? - A. A brown coat; and appeared to be the man I pursued.

Q. Did you charge him, at that time, with having robbed you? - A. I did; some people said they would take care of him; I said, there should be a constable sent for to take him to the watch-house; they took him, as I thought, to St. Bride's watch-house; as I went by I found it shut; and somebody said, he was taken to the Compter; I went to the Compter, and found him there.

Q. Did any thing pass between you there? - A. Nothing; only I said, you are a clever person, I give you credit for your abilities.

Mr. Knapp. Q. It was half past seven in the evening? - A. Yes.

Q. A great number of people were passing? - A. There were.

Q. You got into a crowd, and endeavoured to extricate yourself from it? - A. Yes.

Q. You were not by when the prisoner was taken? - A. No.


I am servant to Mr. Rowen, at the Globe tavern, Fleet-street: This day fortnight I had been out on business for my master; and I returned between seven and eight in the afternoon; I went through our coffee-room into the kitchen; I turned into the yard, and heard some people mustering in the street; I ran out at a back door, and heard the cry of "stop thief;" I saw Mr. Watkins, just at the end of Salisbury-court, try to catch at the prisoner with a small stick; upon which, he cried, "stop thief;" the prisoner passed me, from Mr. Watkins, up into Shoe-lane; he ran up Shoe-lane, and I ran after him; just at the bottom of Shoe-lane I clapped my hand upon his shoulder, and told him he must stop; there came up two men and said, they would take care of him, and rushed between him and me; I said, I would not lose him; one gave me a blow on the back part of my head; I turned round, and looked at the prisoner; he took the watch out of his pocket, and chucked it under his left arm.

Q. You did not see what sort of a watch it was? - A. No; it was a watch and chain; Mr. Watkins came up, and said, hold him, he has robbed me; they made another attempt to take him from me; I would not let them; and the constable, Bird, came up to assist me; the constable went with me down Fleet-street; and he dropped a bag, with something in it, which was picked up; we took him to the Compter; that is all I know; he had a brown great coat up, with straps backwards and forwards; he had a close coat under it; but I did not take particular notice of it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You heard the cry of stop thief? - A. Yes; and I saw Mr. Watkins trying to catch him; when he cried stop thief, he passed me; he was running.

Q. And other persons were running also? - A. only a few boys.

Q. After some time you stopped the prisoner? - A. Yes.

Q. Two men came up and interfered? - A. Yes.

Q. That took up some time? - A. A very little time; I never lost my hold of him; they tried to get between me and him.

Q. How far might the prisoner have gone, or what might be the distance between where Mr. Watkins first pursued him, and where you took him? - A. It might be one hundred yards; it was not two hundred yards before he came to the first turning, I think Harp-alley.

Q. Did these two men go with you afterwards? - A. I did not perceive them afterwards.

Q. There was a good deal of opportunity for this man, if he had the watch in his possession, to have thrown it away; he did not pretend to drop it in the pursuit? - A. Not till he was taken; I saw him pull it out of his right hand pocket, and chuck it out of his hand.

Q. You were not there at the time Mr. Watkins lost his watch? - A. No.

Q. Therefore it was some time after he lost his watch that the prisoner was apprehended? - A. Yes.

Q. You swear positively he threw the watch from him? - A. I am positive.

Jury. Are you sure it was a watch? - A. Yes; because I saw the chain.

Jury. And you did not take it up? - A. No; there was a crowd.

Q. Mr Watkins came up? - A. Yes; and desired me to hold him.

Q. Why did not you desire Mr. Watkins to look after the watch? - A. I told somebody to pick it up, but the mob came in so upon me, that I could not; Mr. Watkins cried out that he was hurt.


I am a milkman: On the 4th of February, between seven and eight in the evening, I was in company with Mr. Stapleton; going down Fleet-street, I saw the prisoner coming, with three other men, as I supposed, to pick his pocket; I followed him up and down the street several times, in pursuit of several people, attempting to pick pockets; I ass in a minute lost him; and Stapleton and me ran down Fleet-street; I observed the

prisoner at the bar in particular; when I came down Shoe lane I saw the prisoner in hold; there was a mob at the end of Shoe-lane; Stapleton and me went into the mob to see what was the matter, and I saw the prisoner, knowing him immediately, in the custody of Mr. Watkins, and Price, the last witness; I enquired what was the matter; and I heard that a gentleman had had his pocket picked of his watch; and that that was the man that did it; there were a number of people about, as I thought, endeavouring to rescue him away; and I said, give me hold of him, I will take care of him; and desired Stapleton to assist me; I took him by the collar, and told him he must go to the Compter; says he, I will go with you; going down Fleet-street, I had him by the collar; he was shuffling about a good deal, and he pulled a large black bag out of his pocket; I saw him drop it; Mr. Stapleton took it up; I intended to take him to St. Bride's watch-house, but it was shut up, and we went to take him to the Compter; he made several attempts to get from me; and if it had not been for the assistance I had with me, I have no doubt but he would have got away.

Q. You did not lose sight of him more than two minutes? - A. It is as much as it possibly could be; the last time I saw him was at Smith and Hartley's door, opposite Serjeant's-inn.

Court. Q. Did you see him near the Globe tavern, Fleet-street? - A. No; that was the time I lost sight of him; I was running down Fleet-street, very near the time the robbery must have been committed.

Court. Q. When you saw the prisoner with the other three men, was he running? - A. Yes; I had been watching them some time up and down Fleet-street.


I was with the last witness, Bird, in Fleet-street, in the same manner that he has related; and after the prisoner was taken in Shoe-lane, I went with him to the Compter.

Q. Did you lose sight of the prisoner? - A. Yes, I did; and Bird and I lost sight of each other; I had lost sight of the prisoner about two minutes; we had been watching them up and down Fleet-street several times.

Q. At the time you lost sight of them were they walking or running? - A. Walking; I saw him throw something away, which I supposed was the watch; instead of that it was this bag, (Producing it); there was nothing in it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. And will you swear that he is the same man you saw in Fleet-street? - A. Yes.


I am a taylor, I was out upon my father's business; coming down Shoe-lane, on the right hand side of the way, between the Globe tavern passage and the corner of Shoe-lane, I picked up this watch, (Producing it); the glass was broke; one of the doors of the Globe tavern is in Shoe-lane; when I came to the corner of Shoe-lane, I heard a gentleman had been robbed, and they had taken the man to the Compter.

Mr. Watkins. This is my watch, my Lord; there was another seal to it, but that is gone; and the case is gone; I cannot swear either to the maker's name, or the number; with respect to the seal, there is my own initial upon it; it is a remarkable small watch; I have not any doubt about its being mine.

Mr. Ally. Q. I understand the outside case is not to that watch? - A. No.

Q. There was an outside case to that watch when you lost it? - A. Yes.

Q. You have not seen it since? - A. No.

Q. You don't know the maker's name, nor number of the watch? - A. No.

Q. As to the seal there is the letter W upon it? - A. Yes.

Q. There are a great many persons, the initial of whose name begins with W? - A. It is very true, certainly; I have no doubt about it; the seal I will swear to.

Jury. Q. Have you had this watch lately? - A. No; it is a watch that belonged to a person in Clare-market; it was not cleared at a sale, and I have wore it ever since.

Prisoner's defence. I have been about four weeks and eight days in London, since I came from Porssmouth; I was second-mate on board a ship there, and I lest her in consequence of some words with the officer; I came up to London to go on board an Indiaman; I expected a parcel to come for me, at the White-horse, Fetter-lane, and I took this bag to get the parcel; hearing a cry of stop thief, in Fleet-street, I saw a few people cross the way, from one side of the way to the other, I joined the pursuit, with an intent to apprehend the people that were running and going up Fetter-lane, or whatever the lane is; I am not positive to the turning, but I believe it is Shoe-lane; I went up there, and in consequence of running up there, a person took hold of me, and said, he supposed me to be the person that had robbed the gentleman that was behind; I told him, I dare say he was mistaken, but if he thought I was the person, I would stay till the gentleman came up, and when he came up, he said, he supposed me to be the person, and six or seven people came up and took me to the Compter; I never saw the watch; the gentleman in the blue coat said, I had it and threw it from

under my arm, but I never had the watch; I told him I was willing to stop till the gentleman came up; when the gentleman, in blue, came before the Lord-Mayor, he said first of all he saw me put my hand in his right hand pocket, and take out something, and let it drop down, and another man picked it up; if this man would swear that, I suppose he would swear that a ship's mast was a long-beat, and a thousand men in it it he saw them at night; I know no more of it than the blessed baby unborn; I have plenty of friends-at Portsmouth and Plymouth, but I have none in London; I have served his Majesty seventeen years duly and truly, and never had a blemish upon my character in my life; I have been under four different admirals.

GUILTY . (Aged 27.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-21
SentenceCorporal > public whipping; Imprisonment

Related Material

157. JOHN MARTIN was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 3d of February , two linen table-cloths, value. 1s. and eighteen yards of linen cloth, value 40s. the property of Elizabeth Yeoman , spinster .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knapp.)


I am servant to Mrs. Elizabeth Yeoman , No. 82, Queen Ann-street East : On the 23d of February, Mr. John Martin , the prisoner at the bar, came to our house in the evening, and enquired for the lady of the parlour; I told him she was not at home, but if he wanted her I would setch her; it was last Wednesday fortnight, I cannot speak to the day of the month.

Court. The 23d of February is not arrived.

Mr Knapp. It was the 3d of February, my brief says it was the 23d; I led her into the mistake.

Green. I called my fellow-servant up, and went for my mistress; I left him at the door.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You say it was the 23d of February? - A. I don't know what day it was.

Q. You have a good deal of company at your house? - A. Not that I know.

Q. You are a new-comer are you, how many ladies have you in your house? - A. Only one lady.

Q. Is she a single lady or married? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Who lived in the family; what is the lady's name that lived there? - A. Mrs. Yeoman.

Q. You are her servant? - A. Yes.

Q. The other servant belonged to the other person up stairs, I suppose? - A. No, she belonged to Mrs. Yeoman.

Q. Had the lady above stairs a servant? - A. Yes.

Q. When the prisoner came to the house, did he rap at the door? - A. No; I was standing at the door.

Q. I take it that is a thing tolerably usual at your house? - A. No.

Q. Your mistress is a married lady, I take it for granted? - A. I believe she is to the best of my knowledge, I don't know.

Q. Does she pass for a married lady? - A. I don't know.

Q. Did you ever see her husband? - A. No.

Q. Does the lady above stairs frequently receive visitors? - A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. What kind of a house is it, in fact, you keep? - A. A very decent house, for what I know.

Q. In point of fact, don't the ladies in your house receive gentlemen? - A. No they don't.

Q. This gentleman came and asked for the lady in the parlour? - A. yes.

Q. Did he mention her name? - A. No.

Q. Did you ever know an instance before of a gentleman coming and asking for the lady in the parlour? - A. Never.

Q. You went for your mistress? - A. Yes; she came with me.

Q. Do you mean to tell me this is a correct and a regular house? - A. Yes.

Mr. Knapp. Q. I believe, when you came back, you found the prisoner in custody? - A. Yes.


I am servant to Mrs. Yeoman; I was called up by the last witness; I went into the parlour, I lighted a candle; I went towards the street door, and there was a gentleman, who is the prisoner at the bar; I said, my mistress is not at home; if you will please to walk in, she will be at home in a minute; he went into the parlour, and stood in the parlour near the door; I lighted the others candle, and desired him to sit down; I went and stirred the fire; there was a new sheet behind the parlour curtain.

Q. Was the sheet made up? - A. It was begun, but not finished; my mistress had been to work in the afternoon about it; I gave it a twist and slung it into the back parlour; the prisoner was in the front parlour, sitting on the sofa; I shut the parlour-door, and went into the kitchen again; there was a double knock at the door, I came up stairs and opened it to a gentleman that belonged to the gentlewoman up stairs; and I saw the prisoner sitting sideways, with his face towards the parlourdoor, on the chair; I let the gentleman in, and he went up stairs; I then turned my face towards the prisoner; he said, I am frightened, I am frightened; I am all of a tremble; frightened, said I,

what are you frightened at? it is a gentleman belongs up stairs; upon that, he got up, and said he must go; no, says I, stop a few minutes, my mistress will be home in a minute; upon that, he said no, he would go, and call again; then, says he, I will stop; he sat himself down in the same posture as he was before, sideways in the chair; I happened to cast my eyes down between his knees, and through the chair I saw the new linen, it was deposited between the end of the sofa and the side of the chair; upon that, I was much flurried, seeing my mistresses property, that I knew was deposited in another room.

Q. The same linen you had put in the back-parlour? - A: Yes; he rose, and said he must go; I said no, sir, you shall not; he went to the passage, and I pushed him back; he said he would go; says I, you are a thief, and a villain; and you have robbed my mistress of her property; he got round the corner to the door; he had a great coat on; we had a good deal of tustle, and he got the door open with one of his hands; I pushed it to keep it close; his coat gave way owing to my clasping of him, as he got out; I cried out, "stop thief, for God's sake, stop thief," he has robbed my mistress; I stept pretty close to him, as well as I could; and I never left him till he was taken and brought back.

Q. When he was brought back, did you see him? - A. Yes; he was the same man that had been in the parlour; I saw the property again in the parlour after he was taken and brought back; I did not see the table-cloths till he was brought back.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. How long have you lived with your mitress? - A. Twenty months; I was nurse to her.

Q. You can tell whether she is a married lady or not? - A. A single lady; she has lost the use of her limbs almost a year and an half; I was nurse to her.

Q. How long had this man been in the house from the time he first came in? - A. It is impossible for me to tell; for I was much alarmed with the sound of a foot walking in the parlour.

Q. How far were you from the parlour when he first came in? - A. I was making one sheet belonging to the new cloth below stairs.

Q. You were below stairs then all the time? - A. Yes.

Q.And the prisoner had been about half an hour by himself; a pretty good time, if he had meant to have committed a robbery, to have gone away in you absence? - A. I don't know; I paid very good attention.


On the 3d of February, near eight o'clock, I heard the cry of "stop thief;" I live in Charlotte-street, Mary-le-bonne; I was taking my window bar in, which I always do at eight o'clock; I ran immediately, and caught the prisoner at the bar; he swung me about three yards, as near as I can guess, and a man of the name of Gibson came up to my assistance, and we took him to Mrs. Yeoman's house; No. 82, Queen Ann-street East; when we got him into the house, he sat down in a chair near a sofa, and laid his elbow on the sofa; at this time he had his right hand in his pocket; he said he was very saint, and I saw something drop from him, which turned out to be two tablecloths, or napkins, or breakfast cloths; Gibson took them up; I should know them again if I was to see them; when I caught hold of him, he begged I would let him go; I told him I would when I brought him to the place where he came from.

Q. Who took charge of the table-cloths? - A. The constable of the night, at the watch-house.

Q. But who took charge of him before that? - A. One Captain Devereux; he belongs to the military; I saw them afterwards at the watch-house, and am sure they were the same.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. Whether you mean to say, that the property dropped from him or the chair? - A. When he sat down there was nothing in the chair.

Q. Had you an opportunity of observing that? - A. Yes.


On the third of February, I pursued the prisoner, with the last witness; I did not come up with him till Gardener had him by the collar.

Q. Was it the prisoner at the bar? - A. It was; I took hold of him on the right side with my left hand, and as we were bringing him through High-street, Mary-le-bone, the people said, he was dropping things out of his pocket; I said he should drop no more, and I seized his hand, and kept hold of it till he came back to the house; he sat down in a chair near a sofa; he drew his hand out of his right hand pocket, and there were two small tablecloths in his hand; he dropped them; that is all I know about it; I took them up, and they were immediately given into the hands of a gentleman, who was in the parlour.

Q. Should you know these table-cloths again if you were to see them? - A. I believe I should.

Q. Did you put any mark upon them? - A. Not that night, but the next day, at the office.

Q. Were those you put your mark upon the same that dropped from the prisoner? - A. Yes.


I was the constable of the night, and watch-house keeper; the prisoner at the bar was brought to me by several people; I cannot say who; they

told me it was for robbing a house; a gentleman, who is not here, produced these two small tablecloths (producing them); I have had them ever since.

Gibson. These are the table-cloths that dropped from the prisoner, and that I saw at the Justice's; there is my mark upon them.

(The table-cloths, being produced, were deposed to by Chapman and Green.)

Prisoner's defence. My Lord, I was coming by and met with the woman at the door; I was very much in liquor; and I asked her if it was to her I spoke a few minutes before; that she said no; I used to come to the house to see ladies: Mrs. Yeoman lodges ladies of the town; and coming to see a lady there, I asked if the lady in the parlour was at home, who had usually lodged there; she insisted upon my walking in, and she would serch her mistress; I said no, I would come again; do, sir, pray walk in; I told her, no; now do, sir, pray walk in; she called to her fellow-servant for a pair of would candles for a gentleman; pray do walk in, sir; I am much obliged to you, I had rather not; I will call some other opportunity; by these persuadings both the women got me into the parlour, and I sat down upon the sofa; as to meddling with any of their property, I know nothing at all about it; that gentleman asked at the Justice's how he was to come by the 10l.(The prisoner called two witnesses, who gave him a good character.)

GUILTY . (Aged 45.)

Publicly whipped in Queen Ann-street East for 150 yards , and imprisoned a fortnight .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-22
SentenceCorporal > public whipping; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

176. JAMES DAVIDSON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 23d of January , a cotton gown, value 5s. and a muslin apron, value 2s. the property of Robert Middleton .


I live in Porter-street, Newport Market : On the 23d of January, I lost a cotton gown and a muslin apron; my husband is an upholsterer , and I work at his business; they were taken from a horse in my room; I am a lodger in the house; I never saw the prisoner till that evening between three and four o'clock; I wa going down stairs to fill my kettle, and met the prisoner at the foot of the stairs; there was a child upon the stairs, and he said, jump up, jump up, twice; I took him to be an acquaintance of the child's mother, and I took no heed him, but went down for the water; as I returned, I met the prisoner coming down with a bundle in his apron; when I went a few steps further, I found my muslin apron on the stairs, that gave me suspicion; I immediately ran to my door, and found the horse had been stripped of the down; a pursuit was made by several persons; and he was taken in Monmouth-street; the person that took him is in Court.


I am a dealer and salesman, in Monmouth-street; On the 23d of last month, between three and four, as I was standing at my own door, I saw the prisoner run from Monmouth-court, across Monmouth-street, with something hanging under his arm; I heard the cry of "stop thief," and immediately pursued the prisoner; as I came pretty near to him he dropped what he had from under his arm, which proved to be a gown; I ran a little further, and took hold of him, and took him into custody,(produces the gown).

Prisoner. Q. Where did you take me? - A. In Compton-street.

Q. Did you not say, you took me as you stood at your own door? - A. No.

Prisoner. When I was taken, I was as drunk as I could be.

Court. That is no excuse, it is only an aggravation of your offence.(The gown was deposed to by the prosecutrix.)

Prisoner's defence. I was running along Monmouth-street, there was a cry of stop thief, and I ran into that gentleman's arms; I never was guilty of any thing of the kind before; I was very much in liquor; I kept a public-house , in Tottenham-court-road; my witnesses were all here yesterday evening; they are now gone home.

GUILTY . (Aged 37.)

Publickly whipped and imprisoned in Newgate three months .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-23
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

177. JAMES RIGGS was indicted for feloniously making an assault upon Maria the wife of John Daniel Dummert , on the 9th of February , and putting her in fear, and taking from her person a box, value 6d. a half guinea, and 1s. the goods and monies of the said John Daniel Dummert .

(The case was opened by Mr. Ally).


I am the wife of John Daniel Dummert : On Tuesday, the 9th of February, at seven o'clock in the evening, I met the prisoner; I was going from my father's house, in Little Prescot street, to my own house in Gower's-walk, near Whitechapel; I was going along Red Lion-street, into White

chapel; the prisoner walked along with me; I went into a cheesemonger's shop; I took out my box to pay for what I bought; I had a bundle under my arm, containing a counterpane and two curtains; when I came out he was standing at the window; he said, you are heavy loaded, shall I carry it for you; I said, no, I could carry it myself; I went into Gower's-walk , and he laid hold of my arm; it is a nasty place, says he, take care how you go; and he put his hand in my pocket, and I heard the box rattle, and it rather alarmed me; he walked a few yards off, and I called out stop thief, stop thief, he has robbed me, he has robbed me.

Jury. Q. Did you miss your box? - A. Yes.

Jury. He did not take your bundle? - A. No; he was stopped at the corner of Union-street; the box was not found upon him.

Q. What kind of a box was it? - A. A small box; there was half-a-guinea and a shilling in it.

Q. When had you seen it? - A. I took the box out of my pocket at the cheesemonger's.

Court. Q. Did you feel him put his hand into your pocket? - A: No; I heard the box rattle, and then I was alarmed; I put my hand in my pocket and missed it.

Court. Q. You are sure it was the box that rattled in his hand? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Did he say he would see you safe home? - A. No.

Court. Q. You are sure you put your box in your pocket, at the cheesemonger's? - A. Yes.

Q. Was there any hole in your pocket? - A. No.

Q. Did you pull your handkerchief out of your pocket? - A. No.

Q. He never attempted to take your bundle? - A. No.

Q. Did you know him before? - A. Not before that night.

Q. What is your husband? - A. A farrier.

Q. A journeyman? - A. Yes; he works with my father, in Little Prescot-street; he is a German.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. You went to the Grand Jury some time ago, you know; this man was called up, and there was a mistake in the indictment, and you were desired to indict him again? - A. Yes.

Q. You told the same story, before the Grand Jury then that you did before? - A. Yes.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. He was before indicted for privately stealing from the person, and now for a highway robbery; the name of the husband was stated wrong.

Court. There is no more pretence for a highway robbery than for-high treason.

Mr. Knowlys. Your Lordship knows there is a reward for highway robbery, and none for privately stealing.(The former indictment read).

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Where did you first meet the prisoner? - A. In Red Lion-street.

Q. Either you touched him, or he touched you, and some conversation took place between you? - A. No.

Q. You are sure of that? - A. Yes.

Q. You are sure no conversation at all took place between you, before you got to the cheesemonger's shop? - A. He said that I was heavily loaded; and I said I was not.

Q. What did you talk of afterwards, did not he say, it was a fine night, and you said, it was? - A. No; he walked on.

Q. Some conversation, of course, passed about the weather, or something? - A. No.

Q. What did you talk about before you got to the cheesemonger's? - A. Only he asked me if he should carry my bundle for me.

Q. Then you went on very familiarly together; he talking to you, and you to him; how was that? - A. We did not talk much.

Q. But you went on talking a little together? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you recollect what passed between you before you came to Red Lion-street, in Leman-street now? - A. It was in Red Lion-street that I first saw him.

Q. Did not you tell him, when you went into the shop, that you should not stay long? - A. No; I did not know but he was gone.

Q. Did not you say, I shall not be long? - A. No.

Q. Did not he say, he would wait for you? - A. No.

Q. You told him where you lived, did not you, No. 1l, Gower's-walk? - A. No.

Q.Recollect Yourself now? - A. I told him I lived in Gower's-walk.

Q. Where was it you told him that? - A. In Gower's-walk.

Q. It is some way from Red Lion-street to Gower's-walk; a quarter of a mile or more? - A. Yes.

Q. You conversed together from the cheesemonger's shop; what did you say to him when you came out of the cheesemonger's shop; did not you ask him why he staid so long for you, or something of that sort? - A. I did not say any thing to him; I did not know but what he lived somewhere thereabouts.

Q. Therefore you were not at all surprised at his staying for you? - A. I thought it was as free for him as me; I did not think of seeing him.

Q. You did not tell him to go about his business;

that would have been rude, you know; you were not angry with him? - A. No.

Q.Therefore you went along sociably together? - A. Yes.

Q. You did not quarrel with him? - A. No.

Q. What did you talk about all that time; I don't know whether he said, my dear, or no; but did he not say, it was a dull place, and he would walk down with you? - A. Yes.

Q. And you were agreeable to his going with you? - A. Yes.

Q. There was a motto upon the box, was not there? - A. Yes.

Q. What were the words upon it, can you tell? - A. I can tell you.

Q. What were tyey? - A."I love too well to kiss and tell."

Q. You say, he put his arms round your neck? - A. No; he took hold of my arm.

Q. How near were you to your own house when this happened; just at the door? - A. No; three or four doors off.

Q. Do you recollect saying, "here is my husband;" and then the man run away? - A. When he had got the box, he ran away.

Q. But you did not see him take it? - A. No; I heard it rattle.

Q. Do you recollect using the word husband? - A. No; I did not mention his name.

Q. Your husband's name, you know, is Dummert; I know You did not mention his name; but did not you say, here is my husband, accidentally, I suppose; what did you say about your husband; did you think he was opening the door? - A. No.

Q. Where was he at that time? - A. At my father's.

Q. What did you say about your husband? - A. I told him, he could see I was a married woman.

Court. Q. He did not touch your person, not your bundle, till you heard something rattle? - A. No, he did not.

Court. Q. Who advised you to after the indictment? - A. One of the gentlemen that was here.


I live with Elwin and Flower, wholesale silk merchants, in St. Paul's Church-yard: On Tuesday, the 9th of February, a little after seven, I was going to Gower's-walk; turning out of Church-lane into Gower's-walk, the prisoner passed by me, walking; the prosecutrix desired me to stop that man, for he had robbed her; the prisoner ran about an hundred yards; he was not out of my sight; I pursued him to the Prince of Wales, the corner of Union-street; and he was taken round the corner, by a person, before I came up to him; his name, I believe, is Robertson; I never saw the prisoner before; I did not see him talking to her, not she to him; when I first saw him, he was walking, and she was walking after the prisoner; and she said, first of all, "stop that man, stop him, for he has robbed me."

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Did you go with this woman to Clerkenwell, upon the former occasion, as well as the last? - A. Yes; I was twice to find the indictment.

Q. Do you know how the second indictment came to be for robbery? - A. As far as I can find, the officer belonging to the office came out, and said, the indictment was wrong found, because the prosecutrix had not given her husband's two Christian names.


I am out of business now; I left the pawnbroking line last summer; I was coming, last Tuesday was a week, from Ratcliff-highway; and, just as I had got to the upper part of Church-lane, I heard the cry of stop thief, stop thief; I had got in the mid-way; it was a very dark night, and likewise very dirty; just as I was getting across, I saw the man coming towards the corner of Union-street; I was within about two or three yards; and being swifter of foot than him, I said hold of him by the breast, and held him till, the prosecutrix and this man came up; he was carried down to a public-house, near the Police-office, and searched, but the property was not found; the woman said, she had a half-guinea and a shilling, there was a crooked shilling found upon him; she denied that being her shilling; she said, her's was a strait shilling.


I am a publican, and a headborough, in Whitechapel; I don't belong to the office; I was in the office on the 9th of February, when this lady came in, and the prisoner at the bar; she said, she had been robbed; the man was apprehended the corner of Union-street; I took a candle and lanthorn and found this box, with a half-guinea and a shilling in it, (producing it); I have had it in my custody ever since.

Mrs. Dummert. That is my box; here is half-a-guinea and a shilling in it.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Are you sure you are right in the words; "Kiss me well, and I won't tell, is not it? - A. Oh, no; "I love too well to kiss and tell."

Court. Q. Did you go up to him when he was stopped at the corner of Union-street? - A. Yes, I did.

Mr. Knowlys. (To Fordum). Q. Whether you advised this indictment to he changed from privately stealing, to a highway robbery? - A. I did not.

Q. Are you sure of that? - A. Yes; Mr. Johnson, at Hickes's-hall, said, it was not made out right; and it was very well it came back.

Q. That is right, but do you know how it came to be altered? - A. He advised the clerk to make it out the other way; he said it could not be privately stealing at all.

Court. How far is Union-street corner from Gower's-walk? - A. Eighty or ninety yards, or thereabouts from the corner, but she was some way down Gower's walk.

Prisoner's defence. My Lord, on Tuesday afternoon, I left the India warehouses, in Billiter-lane; I went upon duty in Seething-lane; I am a warder, I left my duty about seven o'clock; I stepped down to Butcher-row, to buy a steak, to carry home to my wife and three children; this woman came by and touched me, I said, my dear, I would have made room for you, if you had spoke; she said, there is room for me, we sell into discourse; she said, she was going into the cheesemonger's shop; I said, I would stop for her; when she got her cheese, she came out, and we walked along, and she said hold of my arm; we went as far as Church-lane, Whitechapel; I told her I was going up Brick-lane; she asked me which was the best way for her to go, up that lane, or up Union-street; I told her Church-lane was the best, because it was paved; she told me she lived in Gower's-walk, and I would, if she liked, walk with her; I was just going to leave her, and she took hold of my arm again; she said, she would not like to see her husband, her husband was a jealous man; she gave me liberties not proper to speak before women, and I took liberties with her; I kissed her afterwards; I found she was a woman with child; I kissed her, and shook hands with her; she said, there was her husband at the corner, and I went away in a hurry, and she called out, stop thief; this young fellow was at the corner all the while, he did not come after me till I got over the way; the man, at the public-house, said, oh, we want you; I pulled out my money, I had 1s. 4d1/4 I had had a pint of beer at a house in Seething-lane; the woman said it was not her shilling; he took my knife from me, and I was locked up; after it was put down what the good woman said, there were two Jews said, "damn him, we will do for him;" they went out, and in about ten minutes the two Jews and this man came back, and pretended they had picked up this box in the middle of the road; I have watched thirteen years in Crosby-square, besides doing business; my character is well known, I have done duty at the India-house.

For the Prisoner.


I am one of the elders of the private trade, belonging to the warehouses of the India Company; I have known the prisoner twenty years; he has been employed in the India warehouses , under my inspection for the last ten years, and was so at the time he was taken up; he is certainly a very honest man.(The prisoner called six other witnesses, who all gave him a good character.)


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-24

Related Material

178. JAMES FREERS was indicted for that he having been tried and convicted of grand larceny, at the gaol delivery at Justice-hall in the Old-Bailey, on Wednesday, April 15, 1795, and adjudged to be transported beyond the seas, for the term of seven years, was feloniously found at large, without any lawful cause, before the expiration of that term .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys).

JOHN OWEN sworn.

I am servant to Mr. Kirby, the keeper of Newgate; I know the prisoner, he was tried in April session, 1795, (produces the certificate of conviction); I received it from Mr. Shelton, the officer of this court, (it is read.)

Q. Have you any doubt that he is the man? - A. Not the least.


I am one of the officers belonging to Bow-street, I know the prisoner at the bar; I apprehended him on Monday the 18th of January, at the Rumpuncheon, a public-house, in Cross-lane, St. Giles's; he was standing in the tap-room.

Prisoner's defence. I went away from this place to go to serve his Majesty, as I thought, as a soldier; I was pardoned to serve his Majesty, and was very willing to embrace the opportunity of what was granted me; after receiving sentence of transportation, we embarked at Southampton, and went out, there was a hurricane of wind, and we came back to Spithead, we were forty-nine hours without any think to eat or drink, and every body thinking they were going to the bottom; and when I saw every body making theif escape, I thought I had as much right as any body else.

Court. Q. What regiment were you in? - A. The 65th regiment of foot.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 26.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-25
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

179. JOHN JOHNSON was indicted for fe

loniously stealing, on the 26th January , a pair of half-boots, value 3s. the property of William Jenkins .


I am a shoe-maker , in Denmark-street , I lost a pair of half-boots on the 26th of January, I can only speak to the property.


I am a shoe-maker; I work with my father-in-law, William Jenkins ; about dusk, on Tuesday the 26th of January, I was leaning over the hatch, I saw the prisoner take a pair of half-boots off the nail at the shop-door, and put them under his coat; I immediately went after him, and he dropped them in the middle of the street, in St. Giles's; I immediately caught him.

Q. You never lost sight of him? - A. No.

Q. Are you sure he took the boots off the nail? Yes; (the half boots produced in court.)

Jenkins. These are my boots, they have my mark upon them, I always number them, and enter them in a book.

Prisoner's defence. I was on the opposite side of the way when the prosecutor was running after somebody; he came and laid hold of me; I never saw the boots; he came up to me in Holborn, and asked if I had a pair of half-boots; several people were running along at the same time; I told him I had none; a man asked how he could charge me with having the boots, when they were lying on the other side of the way.

Court. (To Summering). Q. Did he drop the boots before you caught him? - A. Yes; he dropped them as soon as I got hold of him.

GUILTY . (Aged 40.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned for six months .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-26
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

180. MARY ANN BAILEY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 3d of February , a silk hair ribbon, value 1d. and 5s. in money , the property of Paul Holland Sierson .


I am a soldier in the 3d regiment of guards ; the prisoner generally bears the character of a woman of the town: On the 3d of this month, about three o'clock in the morning, I was drinking some purl at the King's-head; on seeing me put 5s. in my pocket, wrapped up in a piece of ribbon, she came and asked me if I would go home with her; she asked me to give her a pint of purl, which I did; from her repeated intreaties, I was persuaded to go home with her; she took me to King's-head, court, opposite Drury-lane theatre ; about four or five doors up the court she wrapped at the door, and demanded entrance, and kept feeling round my body; I felt her hand several times about my pocket, but did not entertain the smallest suspicion of her robbing me; at last, some persons within doors, told her she must go about her business, she could not get in; she said, my dear, we must go back again; I put my hand in my pocket, and found the ribbon and money both gone; says I, you have taken my ribbon, she fell a laughing; I told her I should charge the watch with her; the constable searched her pocket, and found 4s. a 6d. and some halfpence; when her pockets were searched, all her money fell upon the floor together, and I suppose the other shilling fell upon the floor.

Prisoner. He treated me very ill, I called the watchman to him.

Sierson. I took her by the neck, and told her I would charge the watch with her; I suppose that is what she means by ill-treatment.


I am beadle of St. Martin's; I was at the watch-house on the morning of the 3d of February, when the prisoner was brought in with the prosecutor; he charged her with taking from his person 5s. she begged to sit down in a chair by the side of me, and when she got up again, she left this ribbon in the chair, (producing it); I took it into my hand, and asked if he would know the ribbon, he described it exactly, and when I shewed it him, he said it was his.

Prisoner. I had that 4s. from Marybone work-house, where I had been some time; I was locked out that night, and he made me go into that public-house to have some purl.


Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-27
VerdictGuilty > manslaughter
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

181. RICHARD ENGLAND was indicted for that he, on the 18th of June, in the twenty-fourth year of his Majesty's reign , with force and arms, in and upon William Peter Lee Rowlls , feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, did make an assault; and that he, a certain pistol, value 5s. charged with gunpowder, and one leaden bullet, which he, in his right-hand, then and there held, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, did shoot off, at, against, and upon, the said William Peter Lee Rowlls ; and that he, with the leaden bullet aforesaid, out of the said pistol, by the force of the gunpowder aforesaid, by him discharged and shot as aforesaid, thereupon feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, did strike, penetrate, and wound him the said William Peter

Lee Rowlls , in and upon the right side of his belly, near his right hip, thereby giving to the said William Peter Lee Rowlls a mortal wound, of the depth of four inches, and of the breadth of half an inch, of which he instantly died; and so the Jurors for our Lord the King, upon their oaths, say, the said William Peter Lee Rowlls , the said Richard England feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, did kill and murder, in manner and form aforesaid .

He also stood charged with the like murder upon the Coroner's Inquisition.

Counsel for the Prosecution.

Mr. Serjeant Adair,

Mr. Mingay,

Mr. Fielding,

Mr. Lawes.

Counsel for the Prisoner.

The Hon. T. Erskine,

Mr. Garrow.

(The indictment was stated by Mr. Lawes).

Mr. Serjeant Adair. Gentlemen of the Jury, it becomes my duty to address you, and to call your particular attention to a case of the importance of that which is now brought before you. The crime that is imputed to the unfortunate gentleman at the bar, by this indictment, you well know, is one of the greatest magnitude that can be committed upon society, that of wilfully and maliciously depriving a fellow-creature of his life; and, I flatter myself, you are sufficiently acquainted with the principles and the administration of criminal justice, to be perfectly satisfied in your own minds, without its being suggested by me or any other person, that in proportion to the magnitude of the crime charged, the guide to your judgment ought to be the clearness and precision of the evidence, whereby that charge is supported.

Gentlemen, you are called upon to perform, I am afraid, a painful duty; but it is an honourable duty also to those who faithfully perform it; and you will find yourselves called upon, to pay a diligent attention to the facts that will be laid before you in evidence; and the directions that you will receive from the Bench, with respect to the law that is applicable to those facts; because it is by these alone that the judgments that you are to form ought to be directed. You are to pay no regard to any facts or rumours that may have reached your ears; except those that shall be substantiated upon oath, by evidence in open Court; and, in forming your judgments upon the legal operation of those facts, for or against the prisoner, I am sure you will be inclined to be guided by the direction of the learned Judge who presides, from whom you will receive the most satisfactory information. Gentlemen, whatever it will be my duty to state to you in these observations, is merely pointed to direct your attention to the material circumstances of the case; but whatever you may hear from me respecting either the one or the other, either the fact or the law of this case, you will wholly suspend your minds, as to any impression which they may make one way or the other, in the recollection that my statement of facts ought to have no weight, except so far as they are supported by evidence; nor any idea that I may suggest upon the law of the case, except so far as it is confirmed by the learned Judges upon the Bench.

Gentlemen, to you is entrusted a very important duty; on the one hand, is committed to you, the protection of the life of the prisoner at the bar, against light suspicions, or unfounded accusations; on the other, the administration of justice, and the support of those laws of your country which are calculated for the protection of the innocent, as well as the punishment of the guilty, is entrusted in your hands; you are to administer justice in mercy; when I say justice in mercy, although mercy is a principle which ought never to be lost sight of in the administration of criminal affairs, yet that mercy is always mistaken which is not directed by the principles of wisdom and of justice; for though it is your duty, in the consideration of every fact laid before you, where any matter of doubt shall occur to your minds, to avail yourselves of that presumption in favour of innocence, which is the principle of the law of England; till it is encountered with satisfactory proof; yet, on the other hand, you well know that it is not your duty to shut your eyes against clear and satisfactory evidence; or to decline, upon any principles of false tenderness, the discharge of a painful duty, if that painful duty should fall to your lot: but you will pronounce a conscientious verdict upon the evidence that will be laid before you; and if the effect of that evidence should be such, as when applied to the known laws of the kingdom, shall satisfy you that the prisoner has been guilty of a breach of those laws, in the point alledged by this indictment, however painful the talk may be, it will be your duty to perform that talk, and to find the prisoner guilty. God forbid you should be led to that verdict by any thing but the clearest and most satisfactory evidence; at the same time that I discharge my duty in laying before you these circumstances, which, on the part of the profecution, we are led to believe will, to-day, be established by evidence; after having discharged that duty, no man will feel more satisfaction than myself, if, upon the result of the whole of the evidence, you shall find yourselves fairly justified before God and your Country in delivering the prisoner from the heavy charge with which he stands accused.

Gentlemen, it will be necessary for me now to state to you, the nature of that fact upon which the charge against the prisoner is founded; it is not that sort of dark insiduous murder committed in secret; difficult of proof, dependent upon circumstantial evidence, which is frequently the subject of your enquiry in a court of justice, that will be the subject of your enquiry to-day, it is a killing, in the face of day, publickly and openly, in the face of many witnesses; so that the fact of the death of the unfortunate gentleman who has for many years been no more, the fact that that death was occasioned by the prisoner at the bar, will, I am afraid, not be a matter of much doubt, or much enquiry. Gentlemen, the only question that can exit in this case will be, whether, under the circumstances, that that death was unfortunately occasioned by, the guilt of murder is or not, properly imputable to the prisoner; and, if I am right in the law upon that subject, I am afraid, that upon the application of that law to the facts in evidence, there will be as little doubt upon that question; for whatever may be the no

tion of honour, that has been prevalent in this and other countries; whatever impression those notions may have made on the private minds and feelings of mankind, I am afraid they neither can nor ought to find entrance into the Courts of justice; and that the law of this country is, what I believe the law of God also to be-that whoever shall wilfully and deliberately, by pre-concerted appointment, armed with instruments of death, meet another, for the purpose of deciding their differences by the fall of the one or the other; which ever party shall fall, or by whomsoever the original provocation was given, the survivor is guilty of murder, by the laws of God and men. That the degrees of malignity and guilt, annexed to that unfortunate circumstance, may widely differ, is a circumstance that no man feels more than myself; but, whatever may be the degree of malignity and guilt, if once the fact, which constitutes the crime of murder, is clearly and unquestionably established. I conceive of these circumstances are more proper for the consideration of those who are entrusted with the prerogative of mercy, than those who are in the first instance entrusted with the administration of the law. The province of a jury is to investigate the facts, and according to the directions they shall receive from the learned Judge, of the application of those facts to the law, they are, according to their oaths and consciences, to decide whether the party is guilty of that offence which is imputed to him, by the indictment; whether the circumstances of that guilt are such as loudly call for the punishment of the law, or solicit the tender interpositions of mercy, under favourable circumstances afterwards, is not the object of consideration.

Gentlemen, I have thought it my duty, in the outset, to state what occurs to me upon that subject, for it is extremely right, that all the circumstances of this unhappy transaction should be laid before you; that public justice may be satisfied, by a full disclosure of every circumstance that may make for or against the unhappy gentleman who now stands upon trial for his life; and if it shall turn out that sort of favourable case, according to the notions and feelings which are implanted in the breast of every man, whatever may be the strict law upon the subject; having, I hope, fairly, and, I am sure, as far as my own opinion goes, faithfully stated to you, what I conceive to be the law, and your duty, acting upon oath, under such circumstances, I shall feel no inclination to press that matter upon your attention. It will, therefore, be my duty, according to the instructions I have received, which I have every reason at present to believe are according to the best information of those from whom I have received them; but which information is liable to mistake, it will be my duty, however, according to that best information, to give you a short and distinct statement of the circumstances attending this transaction, as far as they are material either to the malignity or the degree of guilt imputed to the prisoner; and then it will be your duty upon the whole result of the evidence, to pronounce your verdict, whether the prisoner has, by pre-concerted, deliberate intention, been the death of the unfortunate gentleman who is the subject of this indictment.

Gentlemen, it will be necessary, therefore, to understand the circumstances of this case; that you should not only be acquainted with the fact of the duel itself, but he circumstances immediately connected with it; for I should not think myself at liberty to go into the allegations made on the one side or on the other, that are not immediately connected, or not directly leading to the unfortunate catastrophe that happened. I shall think it my duty neither to attempt to prove or state, as it will be unquestionably your duty to retain your minds perfectly unprejudiced and unbiassed, till you hear the evidence, free from any impressions made by the supposed character of the parties, or by rumours, or loose conversations which have but too much prevailed, upon the subject of this indictment; and feeling that unbiassed mind, and giving that steady attention, which it is your duty to do, to the evidence, you will be guided by that, and that alone, in the opinion that you shall form.

Gentlemen, the quarrel which gave rise to this unfortunate duel, originated in a debt of honour, due from Mr. Rowlls to the prisoner at the bar, which will be proved beyond all doubt, I believe, under the circumstances of this case. It will be necessary, therefore, for me, so far, and so far only, as directly leads to this unfortunate transaction, to state to you what has publicly passed on that occation, and what has passed under a degree of examination, that will not be so liable to misrepresentation.

Mr. Rowlls, at the time of his decease, was a very young gentleman, a gentleman of fortune, and, as I am informed, of character unimpeached, except by those levities of youth which gave rise to the unfortunate transaction; he was a little too found of attending races, plays, and those fashionable amusements, to which young men of fortune are too apt to devote their time, and from that levity of youth arose the circumstance which terminated in his death. I think it was in the year 1780, that he met the prisoner at the bar, who was then a stranger to him, at Ascot races; it appears, from subsequent transactions, that Mr. Rowlls had lost a considerable sum of money to the prisoner at the bar; that circumstance, therefore, gave rise to considerable altereation upon the subject, and security was at length given for a sum of money, not to the prisoner at the bar, but to another. gentleman of the name of Etherington, which afterwards became the subject of dispute; what the nature of that security really was, I shall not presume to state, because that was the subject matter of a dispute, which, to this hour, has never been decided, and therefore on which side the truth lies, I am not entitled to state, not is it material for you to enquire; that security, however, in fact, became the subject of dispute - it being alledged by Mr. Rowlls, that Mr. Etherington was merely a stakeholder, and trustee for Mr. England, for whom this debt was contracted; it being alledged on the other hand, that it was a security for a sum of money, bond-side, advanced and lent Mr. Rowlls, by Mr. Etherington; the security being given by a warrant of attorney to confess the judgment, it became the subject of enquiry in the court in which that judgment was entered; affidavits were made on one side and on the other, each maintaining the truth of their respective allegations, and the court entertained so much doubt upon that subject, as to direct an issue to be tried to determine for what conside

ration the bond, which was the subject of that judgment, could have been given; it being alledged on the one hand, that this was given to Mr. Etherington, as trustee to Mr. England, to cover a gaming debt, which, by law, he could not recover; and on the other hand, that it was money actually lent and advanced. When that cause came on to be tried, it was thought adviseable by the counsel on each side, to compromise the matter, and it was agreed that Mr. Rowlls should pay one half of the sum demanded, with interest; one would have hoped, that, with that compromise, all memory of the transaction had been buried; but a deep resentment lay buried in the mind of the prisoner at the bar, and I believe it will be in proof to you (and if it is not clearly and satisfactorily proved, I beg of you to forget that I have so stated it;) that upon departing from Westminster-half, subsequent to the compromise that I have stated, Mr. England was heard to declare, that the matter should not rest there, but that he would have satisfaction from Mr. Rowlls elsewhere; in what degree that declaration ought to weigh, will be a subject for your consideration, under the direction of the court. Gentlemen, this was, I believe, on the 20th of February, 1784; unfortunately within a few months after this transaction, the parties met together at the same place, where this unfortunate circumstance originated at Ascot races, and there that altercation arose, which was the immediate cause of the duel that followed.

Gentlemen, I am happy to be assured that you will have such an account of that altercation, as will probably leave no room for doubt upon that subject; for I see in Court a noble Lord, of high rank and character, who happened, unpleasantly to himself, and, I am sorry that it has given him the trouble of a painful attendance here, happened to be present at that altercation; and, if his Lordship's memory should serve him, distinctly to relate what the conduct of each of the parties was upon that occasion, you will probably think it unnecessary to trouble you with any further evidence upon that subject. I shall state to you, very generally, what I am instructed, passed upon that occasion; and I am happy to state it in the hearing of witnesses present, who will immediately correct me if I am wrong. I understand, that Mr. Rowlls proposing some betts in the booth upon the race-ground, Mr. England interposed with a considerable degree of animosity; and, on the race-ground, before all the gentlemen of the country there assembled, declared, loudly, that the gentlemen ought not to accept of betts from a person who did not pay his debts of honour. I forbear to state the particular words and expressions, because you will hear them so much more satisfactorily from the witness; but that the substance of them was with reference to the transaction, which I have already stated to you, for the purpose of shewing what gave rise to this unfortunate quarrel, namely, the declaraion of Mr. England, that he, not being, a man of honour, had not discharged those debts which he considered he ought to have discharged; that you will conceive necessarily, to a gentleman in Mr. Rowlls's situation, was a charge that must provoke immediate resentment, wounding his honour, upon a very public occasion, in a sensible point. Mr. Rowlls had seen the transaction in a very different light; he was perfectly persuaded that the conduct on his part, had been honourable; and that, therefore, this was manifestly intended to provoke a resentment that should give rise to the unfortunate circumstances that followed. Mr. Rowlls immediately, with that warmth of passion that might be expected from a young man upon such an occasion, came up to him in a threatening posture; Mr. England, in a threatening manner also, desired him to refrain from personal violence, informing him, that if he had any thing to say to him, he knew where to find him; the meaning of that language is to every man perfectly understood; a meeting took place between Mr. England and a gentleman in the army, who interfered, and the unfortunate business was at that time settled between them, in what manner we can only know from that gentleman; and, therefore, as he will appear here as a witness, I will not state it to you; but an appointment was made on the morning following, to meet, with pistols, at Cranford-bridge, to determine the animosity that subsisted between the parties. In consequence of this, they met at the appointed time and place, with every circumstance of deliberation on both sides, each bringing his second, and pistols; with every preparation for the contest that was to ensure, and one or more surgeons were directed to attend, in case of consequences that were likely to take place. I am afraid, therefore, that if these facts (which were too public to admit of much doubt) are satisfactorily proved, you can admit of no doubt, in your minds, that, whatever were the true merits of the quarrel, their meeting was deliberate and pre-concerted; that, in consequence of a deliberate purpose entertained the day before, and after sleeping a night upon it, with all those circumstances of deliberation and forethought, which exclude that indulgence, I am afraid, which the law gives to the sudden passion of a man. These parties met, with instruments of death, for the purpose of deciding the differences and animosity subsisting between them at that meeting, having been so deliberately planned, the circumstances that passed will be capable of proof, by witnesses of undoubted credit; with respect to that, it is only necessary for me to state, that that unfortunate duel was carried on with an unusual degree of animosity and perseverance. The parties (for I will speak of them at present jointly) did not appear to be satisfied with that sort of vindication of their honour, which has prevailed in this unfortunate, fashionable mode of deciding differences; they did not satisfy themselves with exchanging each a shot, shewing that they met like men of honour, and had kept their appointment; but shot after shot was fired to the amount of four or five discharges on each side, before the deceased fell, that is a circumstance unquestionably material, to which party that obstinacy is imputable, the evidence will best enable you to judge. I am of course instructed, on the part of the prosecution, to state, that it was imputable to the prisoner at the bar; that he refused to be satisfied with those usual modes of satisfaction, which the laws of honour, essentially differing from the laws of the country, have introduced; and that, by the declarations made by him, at that time, you will find, that the object of the duel, I am afraid, was not so much the satisfaction of his honour, as either the fulfilling of his revenge for the injury he had sustained, in not being paid the full amount of the

debt he had demanded, or enforcing that payment by a means, which I will venture to say, if that is the case, neither the laws of honour, nor of the country, can justify; for the subject of duelling, when it it is applied not to the restoration of injured honour, but to enforce the payment of debts, is equally repugnant to the principles of honour as of law. It will, therefore, with respect to the degree of guilt, in this case, be undoubtedly material, that these circumstances should be laid before you; and if it should turn out to he as it is stated to me, I am afraid they will afford a very strong suspicion of the conduct of the unfortunate gentleman at the bar. It will appear, that, in the interval-between the different sirings, certain conversations took place between these gentlemen and their seconds, and propositions were made, which must necessarily relate to the transactions I before referred to, and could relate to nothing else; for that sums of money were offered, by the second of Mr. Rowlls, to Mr. England, and rejected by him; which sums of money put, as I am instructed, the principles of honour entirely out of the question.

Having stated this, which it is my duty to state, from the instructions I have received, which, if they are not proved, I cannot too often repeat to you, that it will be your duty to forget, and lay out of the question. Gentlemen, a circumstance is stated to me, that after several shots had been fired, Mr. Rowlls's pistol went off; and, either by design or accident, was fired into the ground, at so small a distance from himself, that it appeared not to have been directed to the prisoner; and, at the same time, I am instructed, that the prisoner fired his pistol into the air; that circumstance will have, undoubtedly, all the weight that it ought to have in your consideration, and happy would it have been if that had terminated the dispute; whose fault it was that it did not, you will best hear from the witnesses; unhappily it did not; negotiations took place, the parties still remained unsatisfied, and, with a degree of perseverance, I had almost said serocity, unusual upon those occasions, the pistols were again loaded; Mr. England received the fire of Mr. Rowlls, who, I believe, fired first, upon that occasion also: and then, reserving his fire, with some deliberation, he discharged that pistol at the deceased, which killed him on the spot; it wounded him in the groin to such a degree, that he immediately fell, and was carried dead fromthe field, that therefore his death was occasioned, in fact, by the prisoner, in consequence of a premeditated plan for meeting to decide their differences with the weapons and instruments of death; I am afraid there will not be a possibility of doubt; I am afraid that will impose upon you a duty, which undoubtedly will be more or less painful to you, according as the other circumstances of the case shall turn out for or against the prisoner.

Gentlemen, I have thus stated to you (not with very minute particularity which I have avoided for the reasons I have told you) the general substance of the evidence that is to be laid before you, upon the part of the prosecution, It remains, however, to account for a circumstance that cannot but have struck your minds in the attention you have paid to the opening of this case, and that is the dates which you must have noticed, and the distance of time that has elapsed between the death of this gentleman and the prosecution for that death; and it becomes necessary that this matter may stand fairly, and to vindicate the conduct of the prosecution itself, it becomes indispensibly necessary to state to you, that that has been wholly occasioned by the prisoner; I do not wish to draw any stronger inferences of guilt from that circumstance, than your own unbiassed opinions and consciences may lead you to think it warrants; but in point of fact, immediately upon the decease of this unfortunate gentleman, Mr. England sted from the spot, and sted from his country, and remained abroad for a number of years; the prosecution was instituted, proceedings were had against Mr. England, he having sted; the only proceedings which can be had against an absent man were entered, and Mr. England was, by the prosecutrix, outlawed; under that outlawry he remained till lately, when he returned again to England, but, it was not till after, I think, four of the witnesses, who were examined before the coronor, who held an inquisition on the body of the unfortunate gentleman deceased, were dead. Whether by that circumstance public justice will be deprived of the evidence of those witnesses, will depend upon the opinion of the Court, whether they are or not admissible in evidence, if they have been properly authenticated in the manner which the law directs, I conceive them to be admissible in evidence; when Mr. England returned to this country, and appeared at large, he was apprehended upon the outlawry; that outlawry has been reversed, and he now stands upon his trial upon the original indictment. You may, perhaps, think, that after the lapse of so many years, there is a degree of animosity in persisting in coming forward with the prosecution against this unfortunate gentleman for his life; upon that subject, I can only say, that it would be a principle dangerous to the administration of justice, if persons, who withdraw themselves from the reach of the laws of their country, were afterwards to avail themselves of that circumstance, either as a circumstance in their own favour, or as the smallest degree of imputation upon those, who are called upon by a duty, perhaps little less painful than your own, to bring that prosecution into a court of justice. But the feelings and duty of a mother (for it is a mother who is the prosecutrix in this instance) the mother of the unfortunate gentleman, who fell by the hands of the prisoner, the feeling, and the duty of a mother would not permit her to suffer that person whom she conceived to be the murderer of her son, to walk at large in this country, after the commission of such an act, till there had been a full investigation of his conduct, by a court and jury of his country; that investigation I will do her the justice to believe and to assure you, on her behalf, that whatever may be her feelings as a mother, she wishes they may be directed by the principles of public justice only. And, gentlemen, if you should find yourselves warranted by the evidence under the direction in point of law, of the learned Judge to release the prisoner at the bar, I trust the animosities will be buried in the grave of her son, and that she will be perfectly satisfied with your verdict; but I have no doubt that you will pay that attention which the importance of this case deserves, that you will deliberate, with every indulgence that the case of the prisoner requires, consistent with law and justice; and if you find yourselves upon the evidence warranted to doubt that the

death was occasioned by the prisoner, in consequence of a pre-concerted purpose, you will judge whether the case more or less interests your feelings to render the discharge of your duty more or less painful; it will be your duty to deliver him into the hands of public justice, accompanied with mercy, under the direction of those by whom the laws are now to be administered.

The Right Hon. the Earl of DERBY sworn.

Examined by Mr. Mingay. Q. Does your Lordship recollect any thing which took place at Ascot races, in June, 1784? - A. I cannot particularly swear to the year; I have been there several years; but, I believe, I can save the Court a great deal of trouble by saying, that I was present at a dispute which took place between the prisoner at the bar and Mr. Rowlls.

Q. Will your Lordship have the goodness to relate how it commenced, and how it proceeded? - A. I must preface what I have to say on this subject, by stating, that at such a distance of time, it is very difficult for any body to state, with that sort of accuracy that a man would wish upon oath, particular words in a case of this sort; but as accurately as I can, I will endeavour to relate the circumstances that took place; I must also add another circumstance, that I was perhaps at as great a distance from the transaction, as the nature of the place we were in would admit, the transaction taking place at one end of the booth, I being at the other end; but the first thing that struck my attention was, an appeal from the prisoner at the bar to the company, by way of caution, and the purport of it was, not to bet with Mr. Rowlls, as he was a person who neither paid the money he betted, nor the money which he lost; to the words I do not prosess to be accurate, but that was the purport of them; Mr. England was then sitting upon a bench or stand, which might be as wide as this (pointing to the table), and his face turned to the people in the stand; Mr. Rowlls came up to him in a very boisterous and violent manner, and appeared to me to offer to strike him, adding words to this effect, "what do you mean by that you rascal, you scoundrel," or some such words; Mr. England behaved with as much coolness and temper as ever I witnessed upon any occasion in my life; the prisoner said, "stand off, for if you strike me, I shall be obliged to knock you down, (he had a stick in his hand); our altercation has already disturbed the company a great deal too much; if you have any thing further to say to me, you or your friend," or words to that purpose,"know where I am to be found;" some further altercation took place between the parties at that time, as I have reason to believe, both from the circumstance of their remaining in that sort of situation for some time, (though from the distance at which I stood, and the noise in the stand, I could not distinctly hear) and also from having heard so from credible witnesses since; sometime after this the parties withdrew, and from that time to this I believe I have never seen one or the other.

Q. Does your Lordship remember a Captain Donnisthorpe intersering upon that occasion? - A. I do not recollect that circumstance.


My Lord, as there has been a report gone abroad, that I was second to one of the gentlemen, I should wish to put myself under your Lordship's protection; if your Lordship can give any better advice, I shall be happy to take it.

Mr. Justice Rooke. If Mr. Donnisthorpe objects to be examined, we are all of opinion that it ought not to be pressed.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. I certainly shall not press it.

Capt. Donnisthorpe. I have no objection to throw any light upon the subject, as a gentleman, and a man of honour, provided I do not criminate myself.

Mr. Erskine. The very form of the oath renders it unnecessary for us to object, because he must relate the whole.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Will your Lordship permit, that he having been reported to be in the situation of an accessary to this fact, be examined as an accessary.

Mr. Justice Rooke. I cannot make up my mind upon that subject. Can you suggest to the Court, in what way we can admit him; giving him an assurance that he shall never be indicted as an accessary.(The witness ordered to withdraw).

Mr. Sergeant Adair. My Lord, in the first place, it appears highly probable, that the evidence of Capt. Donnisthorpe will be material to the ends of public justice on the one side or the other; because if Capt. Donnisthorpe was present, and accompanied the party in the field, circumstances must be within his knowledge, very materially affecting the merits of this question, which every way his evidence might turn out, whether favourable or unfavourable to the prisoner, I am not now at liberty even to presume; I would rather leave the question, therefore, in the hands of the Court; seeing, as I think your Lordships must do, that this is evidence material for the information of the Court, and material to public justice, and that your Lordship's admitting him now as an evidence for the Crown, will be a protection to him; your Lordship's sitting in a Commission of Oyer and Terminer, stand in the same situation as your Lordships do as Justices of Assize; if it is necessary for public justice, to admit this gentleman as an evidence, he will be admitted in the same way that other witnesses are.

Mr. Justice Rooke. And the Attorney-General would grant a noli proseqnt.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. And even if he is indicted afterwards, no Court would proceed against him, having given evidence before your Lordships.

Mr. Justice Rooke. I will tell you what at present we incline to do, and to hear Mr. Erskine's objection to it; we cannot absolutely protect this witness, but we can tell him, that if he chuses to tell the truth and the whole truth, that though he has no right to the King's pardon, yet, upon the recommendation of this Court, there is no

doubt but he will have it; and leave it to himself whether he will be examined or not.

Mr. Erskine. I have very little to say to your Lordships, upon this question, there is but one idea occurs to my mind upon that. I think if there be any one thing which distinguishes the character of English justice above all other, it is the great caution with which precedents are made, when there is a particular instance on which some other person might be convicted. I am very little accustomed, as your Lordships know, to stand in the situation which I do; it has not happened a great many times, in the course of my professional duty; and though I do not affect to be much acquainted with the forms, though I am with the general principles of criminal justice, I never heard of an instance of a witness being addressed in the manner in which this witness is proposed to be addressed; many witnesses have stood in the predicament that this witness does, and I submit to your Lordships, it would be making a promise which the Court cannot legally do; and, my Lord, after the excellent opening of my honourable and learned friend, the evidence of Captain Donnisthorpe cannot be necessary to prove what he proposes to prove.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord: your Lordships will forgive me, if I take the liberty of adding a few words, in a case of such importance; and, my Lord, I really feel myself in a much more embarrassed situation than before, because I am perfectly aware, that if Capt. Donnistorpe should not be examined, very important facts, in favour of the unfortunate gentleman at the bar, must be excluded from the consideration of the Jury. My Lord, we are not now debating whether this gentlemen is to be examined, aye or no, but whether he is to be put into a situation of indemnity; I must, for one, take the liberty of interposing my objections to his being placed in that situation. My Lord, I have not heard from the learned gentleman, who opened this case, any precedent for such indemnity; I will state several precedents, from whence, the impossibility of a witness being placed in that situation, is, I think, clearly to be inferred; I shall state them from memory, and, I believe, that memory will be found to be correct. I had the good fortune to pass many of my younger years under the learned gentleman who has opened this cause, and, if I know any thing of the principles of criminal law, it was from the advocate for this prosecution that I have learned them.

My Lord, I remember several instances, while I practised in this Court; the first is, the case of Dr. Dodd, who was tried for the forgery of a bond upon a noble Lord; upon that occasion, it was not conceived, that the attesting witness to that bond, who certainly had no moral guilt in that transaction; it did not occur to any body, that he could be entitled to any hope of indemnity; but that course was taken which is the constant practice, that an accomplice in guilt may entitle himself to a pardon, by making, antecedently to the time of trial, a full confession of his guilt, and so obtaining his pardon; thereby giving him such a claim upon the clemency of the Crown, as could not resisted, In that case, Mr. Robertson was the witness, and he was taken sub silentia before the Grand Jury; at which one of your Lordships, who I believe formed a part of that Court, was sorry, saying, that a counsel for the prosecution shall not be permitted to apply privately for a witness be carried to the Grand Jury; but the Court were to be asked leave to take the witness. It is a thing I have seen an hundred times since I have attended in this place.

My Lord, I now come to the case of Mr. Puresoy; a case where I had the honour of conducting the prosecution, and my learned friend, Mr. Erskine, had that gentleman's life entrusted to his care. General Stanwich was the second; he was called, and so anxious were they, that persons absolutely attended as counsel for the witness, and yet there was no idea of indemnity in that case.

My Lord, the next is, the case of Mr. Allen and Mr. Morris, who were tried at this bat; I was not present; my learned friend, who was then Recorder, might be present; Mr. Allen was a principal in the duel; Mr. Morris was Mr. Allen's second; and the gentleman who fell, was Mr. Delaney; Mr. Delaney, I believe, was his second; in that case, the second for the person who fell was examined as a witness; and he was not permitted to ask for the indemnity now asked by Capt. Donnisthorpe; and, I trust, that as it never has been done, your Lordship will not now make the precedent.

My Lord, there is another case; the case of Colonel Gordon; and there was no question but the death of Col. Thomas was occasioned by his hand; the death was proved beyond a possibility of doubt; I had the honour of being one of the Colonel's counsel; Lord Chief Justice, then Lord Chief Baron, Eyre, presided; Capt. Hill, if I do not mistake, was the second to Colonel Gordon; he had all the feelings of a man of honour about him; he did not wish to be examined; and the Lord Chief Baron immediately, of his own motion. stated to Capt. Hill this: - Capt. Hill, it has appeared in this cause, that you have had a share in this matter, which may involve you in a degree of criminality; you may chuse whether you will be examined or not. Capt. Hill felt as every man of honour felt; he wished not to be examined; but, considering that his evidence might be of use to the Colonel, he submitted to be examined; bat not upon an offer of indemnity; and, therefore, I contend, that Capt. Donnisthorpe cannot be examined upon such promise of indemnity.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. My Lord, I shall not press this matter one jot further than your Lordship shall be perfectly satisfied, that what you are about to do, is regular and conducive to the ends of justice; I reply rather on account of the argument used against it, than from any anxiety that I feel upon the point, for I have other witnesses to the fact.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Then Brother Adair, let Captain Donnisthorpe be called in, and I will tell him the situation in which he stands; if he chuses to take the risk, there will be an end of it.

(Captain Donnisthorpe called in again.)

Court. Mr. Donnisthorpe; you have been called here as a witness, and you hesitate to take the oath, doubting how far what you say may affect you hereafter; now, in answer to that doubt, the Court tell you this; they cannot compel you to be examined, but if you chuse to be examined, you must fulfil the terms of your oath, which is, to tell every thing you know, the truth, the whole

truth, and nothing but the truth; you will have that honorary claim to the mercy of the Crown, which all accomplices, in criminal cases, have always had; and it is the established practice of the Courts of Justice of this country, where a witness does acquit himself honourably and fairly between the Crown and the party, that the Court should use its influence to protect that witness against future charges; if, under these circumstances, you chuse to be examined, the Court will hear you; if you think yourself not sufficiently secure, the Court cannot compel you; if you are examined, you will be liable to the whole cross-examination of the Counsel for the prisoner; and you must tell every thing you know respecting this business; I cannot explain your duty in shorter words than those of the oath; it must be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Captain Donnisthorpe. I will be guided by your Lordship's advice.

Court. It would ill become me to give you advice, you must use your own discretion.

Captain Donnisthorpe . I am conscious I have done nothing that I am either ashamed or afraid to speak; but, at the same time, as self-preservation is the first law of nature, no man, I think, would willingly run himself into danger.

Court. The question is, whether you think you are in danger if you act honourably and fairly between the public and the prisoner; do you think, after what the Court have said, you will be in danger?

Captain Donnisthorpe . As there has been a report gone out that I was a second, I fear I might be affected by telling every thing I know; I am at some little loss to know whether it might affect me or not.

Mr. Justice Rooke. The Court cannot invite your examination, it must be for yourself to judge.

Captain Donnisthorpe . My Lord, As it happened so long ago, I cannot give so good an account as I would with.

Mr. Justice Lawrence. The only question is, whether you think sir, after what has been said, to be examined.

Captain Donnisthorpe . My Lord, I had rather be excused.

Mr. Serjeant Adair. My Lord, we now come to the witnesses who were examined before the Coroner, four of whom are dead, in the order of evidence; therefore we shall first submit to your Lordships the depositions of such of the witnesses as we can prove to be dead; I have required into the circumstances under which those depositions come; and, I understand, there will be some difficulty in proving the hand-writing of the Coroner for that purpose; therefore, I will just take up your Lordship's time in calling one witness to prove that fact; the Coroner has been long dead.

Mr. COUSINS sworn.

Examined by Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Were you present at the examination before the Coroner, upon the death of Mr. Rowlls? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you recollect whether the depositions were or not taken down in writing? - A. They were; I signed my own deposition.

Q. Do you recollect whether the Coroner did or did not sign those depositions, after they were taken?

Mr. Garrow. Of course as they are examined apart, be so good as to ask him if he knows any thing more than respecting his own?

Witness. I saw several signed.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Can you speak to whether the Coroner signed them or not? - A. I cannot.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Then, my Lord, we cannot prove his hand-writing.


Examined by Mr. Fielding. Q. In what line of life are you? - A. I live at the George, at Chifwick; I am a coachmaster: In 1784, I was servant to an uncle of mine, who then kept the house.

Q. Did you in the month of June, 1784, go to Cranford-bridge with any body in a carriage? - A. I took up at Turnham-green a lady, to go to Cranford-bridge, with a Dr. Morrell; I used to stop at Mr. Goddard's, at Cranford-bridge, as I went backwards and forwards.

Q.What passed at Cranford-bridge that took your particular attention? - A. I stopped there to freshen my horses, and for the lady to get out, which she generally used to do; when I stopped, there was a lad waiting with a post-chaise; he was the first boy; what he said to me induced me to go through the house; as soon as I had got the lady out of the carriage, I went to the back of Mr. Goddard's garden, and there were some gentlemen fighting a duel in the common field about 50 or 60 yards from the garden.

Q.Describe to my Lord, and the Gentlemen of the Jury, what you observed? - A. I saw no more than four; one of them, as soon as I came to the hedge side, I knew was Mr. Rowlls; two of them stood to the east and two to the west; it might be about 18 yards from each other; Mr. Rowlls was dressed in a light coloured waistcoat, with stripes round the pocket-holes, and narrow lace up the border, I cannot say positively, but to the best of my recollection he had no coat on; I heard some lady cry out, "Gentlemen, is not three times enough to try your courage, or do you want to murder one another;" a Lady D'Arterie they called her; soon after the same lady, to the best of my knowledge by the voice, said, Lord D'Arterie wanted to speak to them, and then they all four came very near where I heard the voice come from, to the best of my recollection, but I did not hear any conversation pass; they then went back to their ground again that they came from, and presented their pistols at each other; Mr. Rowlls's pistol went off, and the other gentleman's did not go off; I did not know his name; they said it was a Mr. England; then he presented the pistol again, and it went off, and shot Mr. Rowlls in the groin, as near

as I can recollect; he took a bit of a feel, and fell on his left side.

Q.What then became of the person who had shot him? - A. He went through the field, I believe, with the rest of the people; I should have interfered for Mr. Rowlls, as I knew him so well, to have prevented it, but there was a cry of keep off, that our lives were in danger, and to leave the business alone; but I cannot say whether it came from Mr. Rowlls's party or the other.

Q. Did he go up towards Mr. Rowlls as he lay on the ground? - A. I cannot speak to that.

Q.Had you an opportunity to speak to Mr. Rowlls? - A. No; when I went through the hedge into the field, I could not see any life in him; I took up the pistol that was in his right hand, and went and said, Mr. Rowlls was no more; and then I saw the two gentlemen who stood to the west come round into the bowling-green house, and put their pistols into a box, which they put into a port-chaise, and made the best of their way towards London; one of them came out of the chaise again to get a sword, or pistol, or something he had left behind and got in again.

Q.From the opportunity you had of observing the person who shot Mr. Rowlls, are you able to guess whether you should know the person again? - A. I don't know that I should; I don't think I should; I did not know any of them but Mr. Rowll.

Q.Where did you know him; who was he? - A. He was a brewer , at Kingston upon Thames; his mother goes by the name of Lee now, but her name was Rowlls then; he used to go frequently to a public dinner at Brentford where I have been, and I have had him sing a song.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. He was rather a wild, dissipated young man? - A. I don't know; he was a joculer, merry young man.

Q.The two gentlemen that went away, went away in a chaise and pair? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see a chaise and pair waiting for Mr. Rowlls and his friend? - A. No; I saw but one chaise.

Q. If you don't know it, it is easy to say so; do you happen to know whether there was a chaise and four in readiness for Mr. Rowlls? - A. No, I do not.

- PALMER sworn.

Examined by Mr. Mingay. I am a collar-maker at Hounslow; I happened to be at work at the Inn, at Cranford-bridge , at the time this unfortunate business happened; I was mending the harness when I heard the roport of two pistols, almost together; I immediately left my work, and went down into the meadow; I laid down in the field; and, while I was there, a shot came very near me; I went from there up into the cart-house.

Q. How far distant were you from the combatants then? - A. I suppose, not above a dozen, or fourteen yards, as nigh as I can recollect; it was a cart-house upon the same land. I saw Mr. Rowlls with his coat off; I did not know Mr. England; Mr. Rowlls, and Mr. Donnisthorpe, his second, walked up to the other gentleman, and his second, and I think I heard one say he would give 100l. and the other said, he would have 200l.; and then Mr. Rowlls turned short upon his left, went to his ground, and fired at Mr. England.

Q. Can you say who it was that said he would give 100l.; and who it was that said he would have 200l.? - A. I cannot recollect; I have had two sits of a fever since, so that my memory has failed me very much; one just before last Christmas, and the other just after this affair happened; I cannot recollect many things that I should do in my business now.

Court. (To Sandeford.) Q. You say you saw a pistol presented just before Mr. Rowlls fell; was it fired as soon as it was presented? - A. It was a considerable time, so that a person had time to take a particular aim.

Jury. Q. You said the pistol snapped; was it primed afterwards? - A. No; he held it in his right hand.

Q. That was Mr. Rowlls's pistol? - A. Yes.

Q.But the other pistol that did not go off, did you see it primed in order to discharge it afterwards? - A. I did not particularly notice; there was not any flash in the pan, so that the priming might remain in; but it went off afterwards, because I saw him fall.

Q. What time do you think it was from the pistol snapping first, till you saw it fired? - A. I cannot speak to the time; It might be the space of a second or two.


Examined by Mr. Lawes. Q. Did you live at Cranford-bridge in 1784? - A. Yes; I worked, as gardener, at Mr. Goddard's; I was there when two gentlemen came into the room where I worked; I was nailing a tree against the wall; I did not know them; I saw them open a box with pistols in it; and they got out at the window, instead of out of the door.

Q. Look round, and tell us if you see either of the persons here? - A. I cannot be sure, because I never saw the gentleman before nor since; I saw but two fires; I cannot say which fired first or last; but I saw Mr. Rowlls fall, and the other gentleman got into a chaise and went away.

Q. Do you know how many pistols were fired?

- A. I heard as many as five, but I cannot say any further.

The Right Hon. LORD CREMORNE sworn.

Examined by Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Did your Lordship stop at Cranford-bridge, at the time that the affair happened, which is the subject of this enqury? - A. I did.

Q. Will your Lordship have the goodness to tell us what you saw and heard at the time; you were at that time Lord d'Arterie? - A. Yes; I went up stairs to write a note, to send back by the postision; while I was writing, I heard a shot; I was told there was a duel fighting; I immediately went down to a field where there were ten or twelve people; there was the Rev. Mr. Burrows, and Lady d' Arterie, met at the bottom of the stairs; Mr. Burrows and I agreed to go down and endeavour to stop further disagreement; to see if it could not be adjusted; we went down to the hedge, and Mr. Burrows addressed himself to the combatants; the second of Mr. Rowlls told us, we had no business there; it was not an affair of ours; and desired we would go away; upon this, there was no answer made; Mr. England advanced some steps towards us, took off his hat, and said these words, "Gentlemen, (says he) I have been cruelly treated, highly injured in my honour and character, let there be a reparation made to that, and I am ready to have done this moment." Immediately upon Mr. England's retiring to his ground again, the second of Mr. Rowlls addressed us a second time; and told us, it was no affair of ours at all, that if we did not go away, he should be obliged, however unwillingly, to make use of the word impertinent; Lady d'Arterie was there, while we were speaking, and fearing some words might pass disagreeably, she ran down alarmed along side of the hedge, where we were; and told the second, upon his making use of that word, "Sir, (says the) neither Mr. Burrows nor Lord'd Arterie, mean the least impertinence, be assured they do not; only give them leave to try if they cannot interfere so as to prevent the consequences."Mr. Rowlls's second said, "Gentlemen, I beg you will go away; madam, I beg you will go away." Upon that, we retired; the Rev. Mr. Antrobus went up, with Lady Cremerne, and I don't know whether Mr. Burrows went up with her, to prevent her seeing any consequences that might shock her; I staid in the bower till I saw Mr. Rowlls fall.

Q. Had your Lordship an opportunity of seeing by whom the shot was fired, upon which Mr. Rowlls fell? - A. I did; that person was Mr. England.

Q.Should you know the man again? - A. I never saw him but that once in my life, that I am not clear, about it; before Mr. England fired his pistol, Mr. Rowlls came up and spoke, but so low, that I did not hear what passed; Mr. England stood at his arm and drew back the pistol; I don't know what it was owing to, and Mr. Rowlls came up.

Cross-examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. Your Lordship has given evidence so very distinctly, that the Court and Jury have an opportunity of knowing it, and I shall only ask you one question; you have stated the language in which Mr. England addressed your Lordship, which is too plain to require a comment from me; did your Lordship see any thing which took off the impression made upon your mind by what he said to you of his disposition to peace? - A. The impression upon my mind was, that he was desirous of being done with it, if there was that reparation made to his honour.

Q.On the other hand you observed great violence on the part of Mr. Rowlls's second? - A. I certainly did.

Q. I take it for granted Mr. Rowlls was near enough to be witness to that violence of his second? - A. He was close behind him.

Q. Mr. Burrows, I believe, is a very respectable clergyman, and a friend of your Lordship's? - A. Nobody more so; he is since dead.

Court. Q. Will your Lordship have the goodness to step down towards the bar, and see if your Lordship knows any person there?(The Court ordered that several persons should stand with Mr. England, at the bar).

Lord Cremorne. A. I am not quite clear, my Lord; it is so long ago, that I cannot upon my oath say.


Examined by Mr. Mingay. I am a grocer, at Chertsey: I did live at Eaton.

Q. Do you know the prisoner at the bar, Mr. England? - A. It is so long ago that I cannot say I recollect him; I knew him very well then; I had known him four or five years.

Court. Q. Can you say whether that is Mr. England or not? - A. I believe it is.

Mr. Mingay. Q. Have you any doubt upon your mind? - A. No; I was present at the time this unfortunate affair happened; I went to Cranford-bridge, at the request of Mr. Rowlls, the deceased, as a friend of his; we were at Windfor the night before the duel; and he asked me to go over with him; I heard two pistols fired; I saw nothing of the duel; but I met the prisoner after it was over, going into a chaise; a girl said, "Good God! Mr. Rowlls is shot!" Mr England came up at the same time, with two pistols in his hand; he threw up one of them in the air, and said, "yes; and

I would not have shot him now, if he had behaved like a gentleman.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. Were you present when Mr. Rowlls was cutting a stick the evening before? - A. No.

Q. Did you sup with him? - A. No.

Q. You were not present at any toasts that he drank upon his knees? - A. No.

Q. You are sure of that? - A. Yes.

Q. How late was it when you left him? - A. Between ten and eleven o'clock; I lived at Eton at that time, and I went home.

Q. Were you with him when he drank some spirits in the morning? - A. No; I did not see him in the morning.

Q. You did not hear the expressions he made use of when he threw them down? - A. No.

- FROGLEY sworn.

Examined by Mr. Lawes. I am a surgeon: I was present at the time the ball was extracted from Mr. Rowlls.

Q. Have you any doubt, as a surgeon, of the cause of his death? - A. None in the world.

Q. To what do you ascribe it? - A. To the ball; to the best of my knowledge, that was the cause of his death.

Mr. Garrow. Q. You were not the surgeon who attended Mr. Rowlls to Cranford-bridge? - A. No; I did not see him till an hour after his death.


I am an attorney.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Do you remember, about the month of February, 1784, any proceedings, in Westminster-hall, between you and Mr. England?

Mr. Erskine. You must not preface your question by appealing to that which you cannot prove in Court; alluding to certain proceedings, which are, not proved, neither can be proved; and in the next place, this being charged in June, you have not shewn any connexion.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Q. Do you mean to give any intermediate evidence?

Mr. Sergeant Adair. A. No, my Lord.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Then we are all of opinion you should not offer it.

Court. (To Lord Derby). Q. You have given us an account of the conversation that passed at Ascot, can your Lordship tell how long that was before the duel was fought? - A. I know nothing of the duel, of my own knowledge; but, I believe the duel took place next morning.

(Mr. England put in a written defence, which was read by the clerk, as follows):

Gentlemen of the Jury, I will lay the condition of my mind before you, as it existed throughout the transactions, which, indeed, were the causes of the unfortunate event, which brings me. a long exiled and suffering prisoner, before you; and I address you most solemnly, and in the presence of God, to whom alone I can appeal for the truth of my declaration. Mr. Rowlls had soread reports injurious to my character; and to remove this unfounded and ruinous imputation, I solemnly declare, all my conduct was directed; and it is surely incredible that I should be desirous to expose my life to the most imminent peril, in pursuit of an insignificant sum of money; but yielding to the feelings of honour, I was anxious to redeem myself from shame, urged by a principle that has always been considered by juries with tenderness and indulgence. The situation in which, most unfortunately I was placed, by his conduct, led to the altercation in the stand, as proved by Lord Derby, was resented by the deceased, by a public challenge, accompanied with insults and reproaches, and threats of blows, which left no alternative between my consent to meet him, and the relinquishment of the title of a gentleman, and of every comfort that renders human life any other than an intolerable burden. Gentlemen, still speaking in the presence of God, who knows the heart of man, I received my adversary's challenge, and met him in the field with no other sensation than regard to my wounded character, which I laboured to repair without danger to Mr. Rowlls, and struggled to avert from him all dangers, in a manner almost without parallel in any one case where affairs of honour have ever unfortunately been brought to such a crisis; after I had exposed myself three times to death, because the declaration which was to restore my character, was refused; I fired my pistol in the air, the signal of peace and reconciliation; I did so to give Mr. Rowlls an opportunity to do me justice, without a possible restection upon his own character; I did that at the risk even of my own honour to satisfy his, and to avoid the horror I felt at being the cause of death, by the possible accidents of that unfortunate situation. The honourable and learned advocate for the Crown indulgently directed your attention to this circumstance in my favour; after the interference of the gentlemen who attended us, all justice was refused, and I was left to the dreadful alternative of retiring disgraced and dishonoured, or submitting to the progress of the duel, which he was resohed to pursue; again, I received Mr. Rowlls's fire, without the least disposition to return it, exposing my life to further peril, keeping danger from him, seeking nothing but the privilege of living not disgraced, which, in my mind, is worse than not living at all. For the proof of these transactions, I need not now appeal to the testi

mony of witnesses, because a most disinterested and honourable nobleman providentially present, by mere accident, upon the spot, has proved it; but it has appeared in evidence, that the unfortunate gentleman came to the field with sentiments and feelings widely and fatally different from mine, as appears by Lord Cremorne's evidence; but unfortunately Mr. Rowlls came resolved, that nothing should terminate the quarrel but his death or mine; and with the resolution also, to make no reparation to my honour, though his could not have suffered; because I offered to go publickly to the stand, and satisfy him. My own conscrence acquits me of malice; and I leave myself in your hands, upon the liberal principles avowed by the learned and honourable advocate for the prosecution, who does not wish to shut out of your view those circumstances which, in this day, may bring before you for judgment, the most humane and best of mankind.

For the prisoner.

The Right Hon. the MARQUIS of HERTFORD sworn.

Examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. I believe your Lordship has had some opportunity of acquaintance with Mr. England? - A. None, previous to the unhappy affair which occasions his appearing at this bar; but I have observed his humane conduct abroad for fifteen years past, particularly at the Spa; he was always distinguished by the civility and respect which he shewed towards every person with whom he had intercourse; he always behaved generously and handsomely to his countrymen when in distress; and, instead of promoting quarrels and diffention, would endeavour to avoid them; I have observed instances in which he has shewn a very pacific disposition, so far as was consistent with the character of a gentleman.

Q. From your Lordship's observation of the character and conduct of Mr. England, and from facts communicated to you, by others, do you take him to be a troublesome man, promoting quarrels, or a peaceable man? - A. I am persuaded, from all I have seen of him, he is totally devoid of the murderous disposition imputed to him out of doors, and which, I hope, is wiped away by the handsome manner in which Lord Derby has spoke of him.

Court. We cannot hear that, my Lord.

A. Mr. Garrow put it to me very generally; I beg your Lordship's pardon.


Examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. I believe you have been acquainted some time with the unfortunate gentleman at the bar? - A. My first knowledge of Mr. England was in or about the year 1783; I frequently met him at places of public resort; afterwards at Spa, in 1787; his behaviour, as far as ever it came under my observation, was decent and gentleman-like; his deportment, instead of that of a man seeking quarrels, was that of a man strenuous to avoid them.

Q. Did he appear to you, from his general deportment, to be a man of a quarrelsome disposition? - A. Quite the contrary: and, I must beg leave to add, that my opinion of his disposition, in that respect, was formed previous to the unhappy accident which took place, and has been continued down to this time.

Colonel BISHOP sworn.

Examined by Mr. Const. Q. You have been many years acquainted with Mr. England? - A. A great many.

Q. What character, from your observation of his conduct, has he bore? - A. I never saw the least inclination in Mr. England to provoke any man; I have always considered him as a well behaved man, and a well-bred man; I never saw the least tendency to quarrel or provoke any man.

Q. On the contrary, was he peaceable in his disposition? - A. Upon my oath, I think remarkably so.

Colonel WOLLASTON sworn.

Examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. I believe you have had an opportunity of observing the deportment, on very trying occasions, of the unfortunate gentleman at the bar? - A. I have.

Q. You commanded his Majesty's troops, I believe, at Nieuport? - A. I did.

Q. Tell his Lordship, and the Jury, the impression made upon your mind, from your general observation of his deportment? - A. Mr. England had to pass through Nieuport, while I commanded there; his wish seemed to be to give me all the information he could, relating to the enemy.

Q. Did his conduct appear to be good and zealous for the interests of his country? - A. Certainly very zealous indeed, at the risque of his life.


Examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. How long have you been acquainted with Mr. England? - A. Twenty years.

Q. Be so good as tell these gentlemen what is his character, whether he is of a humane, kind disposition, or the contrary? - A. In every situation, public and private, he would put up with an injury, upon the slightest apology, sooner than resent it; he was never quarrelsome.

The Right Hon. the EARL of DERBY called again.

Examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. I believe you had a knowledge of the character and conduct of Mr. England? - A. I have known him fifteen or sixteen years.

Q. Will your Lordship have the goodness to state your general opinion of his character? - A. His character is that of a well-behaved, polite gentleman; he appeared upon all occasions more studious to avoid quarrels than to promote them; and, I will add, that in the instance I have already been examined to, Mr. England bore it with a great deal more temper than I should have done myself.(Summing up.)

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury: the prisoner, Richard England, stands indicted for the murder of Peter Lee Rowlls, on the 18th of June, 1784, at Cranford-bridge, by shooting him with a pistol. It appears, in the course of this evidence, that the death of Mr. Rowlls ensued in consequence of a duel, and therefore, before I sum up any evidence to you, it will be very proper that I should open your minds upon the law of this land, on the subject of duelling, and I believe I shall have the concurrence of my two brothers on the bench with me, when I tell you that there is no doubt, that in point of law, when two parties meet together deliberately, and not in the then heat of blood for the purpose of seeking each others lives, that whoever gave the challenge, if either falls, it is murder in the other, by whose hand he falls. I state this, not on the authority of the Judges of this day alone, but I will state to you a series of authorities of the ablest and best men that the courts of judicature of this country have ever known, from Lord Coke down to the present time.

Lord Coke, in a case, very similar to the present, the case of one Taverner, who had fought a duel, who had fled his country, who was outlawed, who returned after that outlawry, and got his outlawry reversed, was afterwards tried at the bar of the King's-bench, and in that case, Lord Coke, assisted by Croke, Dodderidge, and Haughton, laid this down for law: "This," says he," I say, for law, that if one only do give the cause of provocation, and send the challenge, and the other accepts of it, and upon this they enter combat, and he who sends the challenge is killed, this is clearly murder in the other." My Lord Hale, as humane a Judge as ever sat in a court, adopts this case, and cites it in his treatise for law. My Lord Chief Justice Holt, who had as tender a regard for the liberties and lives of his fellow-subjects as any man ever had, in the case of the Queen and Moggeridge, supposes this case, that in a set duel there are mutual passes made between the combatants, yet, if there be original malice between the parties, it is not the interchange of blows will make any alteration in the original intention. If a time was appointed to fight, as suppose the next day, and accordingly do fight, it is murder in him that kills the other; but if they go into the field immediately and fight, then but manslaughter. My Lord Raymond, who was a great ornament to the judicature of this country, in giving the opinion of the judges in the case of Major Hoadley , who had killed a Mr. Gore in a duel, cites with approbation these two cases from an author of authority, of the name of Crompton; he says, "Two quarrelled, one says, if you go into the field, I will break your head, and there one kills the other, murder. Two fell out on a sudden in the town. and they, by agreement, go into the field presently, and one kills the other, murder." And he follows this case up with this doctrine,"though the law of England is so peculiarly favourable as to permit the excuse of anger and passion (which a man ought to keep under and to govern), in some instances, to extenuate crimes even so heinous as that of taking away man's life; yet in these cases it must be such a passion, as for the time deprives him of his reasoning faculties; for if it appears that reason has assumed its office, if it appears that he reslects, deliberates, and considers, before he gives the fatal stroke, (which be cannot as long as the sury of passion continues,) the law will no longer exempt him from the punishment, which, from the greatness of the injury, and the heinousness of the crime he justly deserves, so as to lessen it from murder to manslaughter." This doctrine is again adopted by Sergeant Hawkins , in his pleas of the Crown, and is also adopted by Mr. Justice Foster, whom the public revered for his humanity; and it is followed up by Mr. Justice Blackstone, in very particular words: he says, "Express malice is when one with a sedate, deliberate mind, and formed design, doth kill another, which formed design is evidenced by external circumstances, discovering that inward intention, as lying in wait, antecedent menaces, former grudges, and concerted schemes to do him some bodily harm. This takes in the case of deliberate duelling where both parties meet avowedly with an intent to murder, thinking it their duty as gentlemen, and claiming it as their right to wanton with their own lives, and those of their fellow-creatures, without any warrant or authority from any person, either divine or human; but in direct contradiction to the laws, both of God and man, and therefore the law has justly fixed the crime and punishment of murder on them and on their second, also; yet it requires such a degree of passive valour to combat even the dread of undeserved contempt, arising from the false notions of honour, too generally received in Europe, that the strongest prohibitions and penalties of the law will never be entirely effectual to eradicate this unhappy custom, till a method he found out of compelling the original aggressor to make some other satisfaction to the affronted party, which the world shall esteem equally reputable, as that which is now given at the hazard of the life and fortune, as well of the person insulted, as of him who hath given the insult." Upon this ground, I have no doubt in stating to you, that where parties meet deliberately together, seeking the life of each other, and have not the excuse of sudden provocation, and such passion as overpowers their reason; there is no doubt that the law considers, that if one falls, the death of that person is procured by murder, and that the other is guilty of that crime. The law here you see is strict and positive; there is a false notion, and a fashion in the world, on the other side, it will be for you to say, after I have stated the circumstances of this case to you, whether you think there are grounds to suppose here that there was any sudden passion or provocation; whether the parties were in such heat of blood as not to know what they did at the time they were fighting the duel; if you are of opinion there was no such heat of blood at that time, then I must tell you, that if you pronounce the prisoner guilty of manslaughter and not of murder,

you will give way to the fashion of the times, at the expence of the law of the land.(Here the learned judge summed up the evidence to the Jury, after which he proceeded as follows:)

Gentlemen, upon these facts the prisoner's case is to be lost you, and I believe I have the concurrence of my having on the bench, when I tell you that a deliberate due upon whatever provocation in the eye of law, is plater; for the law does lean to repress those false notions of honour, which men unhappily have taken up among themselves; it will keep the peace, and will keep it diligently and carefully whenever there are any opportunities of intersering, but will not suffer a person, through a false notion of honour, to meet deliberately in a field, with a design to take away the life of another. at the same time the law says, if they meet under circumstances of sudden provocation, the man who takes away the life of the other is guilty of manslaughter only.

Gentlemen, you have heard the circumstances of this case; there is a quarrel at Ascot-heath races, and a very gross insult is given on both sides as appears to me; for on the one side there is a public proclamation, that the deceased would not pay what he borrowed, and then there is an attempt to strike Mr. England, accompanied with these words, "what do you mean by that, you rascal, you scoundrel." or some such words; the next day they meet at Cransord-bridge, coming in different parties; it does not appear that they had met in the room before they got to the field; you find that there is great heat on the part of Mr. Rowlls's second; it rests on the prisoner to shew that he had received, immediately before the duel, some ground of provocation; there is nothing of that kind shewn on the part of the prisoner. It appears from Lord Cremorne's evidence, that at the time that his Lordship and others intersered, Mr. England took off his bat and said, "Gentlemen, I have been cruelly treated, highly injured in my honour and character, let there be a reparation done to that, and I am ready to have done this moment." Upon these words, gentlemen, I had better make no comment at all; I shall leave you to consider whether these were the words of an angry injured man who had received that morning any particular insult; or of a man who did it in consequence of what passed the day before, deliberately at Ascot races. - If you think they are the words of a deliberate man, they make against him; if you believe they are the words of an angry man, as relating to something that passed immediately before the duel, they are in his favour; on the other hand, you have this declaration which makes against the prisoner, that after he had shot Mr. Rowlls, instead of going up to assist Mr. Rowlls, he makes off for his chaise; and, in consequence of the exclamation of the servant girl, he says, "I would not have shot him now, if he had behaved like a gentleman:" you will consider that expression, whether that shews that he was in possession of his senses at the time, and whether it shews matter of deliberation and coolness, and such as the law will not consider as varranting you in declaring this to be a manslaughter; namely, it you find Mr. England to have been cool, and in the possession of himself before the duel, during the tuel, and after the duel, the law is strict; if on the other and you think he had met with any provocation that morning (none appearing before us,) so as to carry him to the field in great heat of blood, then the law does so far indulge, and allow for the insirmities of human nature; as to authorize you to say, upon your oath, that he is guilty of munslaughter only. - Under these direction it will be for you, gentlemen, to decide.(The Jury having withdrawn about twenty-five minutes, brought in a verdict NOT GUILTY of the MURDER, but GUILTY of MANSLAUGHTER ).

Mr. Justice Rooke immediately passed sentence as follows:

Richard England - You have been convicted, through the mercy of the Jury, of the crime of Manslaughter only, having been indicted of the crime of Murder. The grounds on which the Jury have gone, it is not for the Court to enquire after; I have no doubt that they have satisfied their own consciences in acquitting you of the murder; but you stand before the Court under such circumstances as do not lead this Court to incline to shew any particular lenity to you; you have fled the justice of your country for twelve years; you have, in the course of that time, had benefit from the death of several witnesses who were examined before the Coroner; and, by not chusing to meet the justice of your country immediately after the crime was committed, you have prevented the Court from knowing fully all the circumstances of this case; such circumstances as have come before them, lead the Court to think that your case, though of Manslaughter, is by no means a favourable case of Manslaughter; for you have met your fellow-subject deliberately in the field, and, for aught that I can see in the course of this evidence, you have perfectly preserved your recollection and deliberation during the whole of the transaction. It is very much to be lamented, that the laws of honour, which prevail among, I am afraid, almost all the ranks of society at this time, should be so directly in opposition to the public law of the land; but it is so, and it often serves, and in this instance it has served, to prevent you from executing the dreadful, the grand, and the ultimate vengeance of the law.

Having been convicted of Manslaughter, the Court think it proper to set you forth as an example in future, to let the world know, that they cannot commit even the crime of Manslaughter in a duel, without subjecting themselves to very considerable punishment; such punishment as the Court are warranted in inflicting, they do inflict upon you. The sentence of the Court upon you, therefore, is, that you be fined One Shilling , and imprisoned twelve months .

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-28
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

182. WILLIAM POOREY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , two

pieces of bar iron, of fifteen pounds weight, value 2s. 6d. the property of Thomas Myers .


I live at No. 110, Brook-street, Ratcliff-highway ; I am a blacksmith ; this iron, (producing it,) was found upon the prisoner; it is my property; it was marked down, and cut, to make some bridges for Mr. Shakespear.

Court. Q. What do you mean by marking it down? - A. Out of the bar, into these lengths, to be cut down; the prisoner was my servant, and worked in the shop upwards of twenty years as my foreman .

Mr. Ally. Q. It is the same as any other iron of the same dimensions? - A. I cannot say.

Court. Q. Is there any thing you can swear to it by, but the length, and its being cut down? - A. No.

ANN MYERS sworn.

On the 29th of January last, between six and seven in the evening. I was informed somebody was taking some iron away; I went to the door, and the prisoner was coming past with the iron; I said, Bill, your master wants you; he said he would come presently; I said, I want to have a word with you now; and he put the iron behind him; I told him he was a thief, and I had detected him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. Where did you first discover the prisoner and the iron? - A. At the front door; he had taken it off the wall.

Q. There is a wall to the street, and the iron was upon it? - A. Yes.

Q. And he was coming round to the shop-door? - A. He was come clear from it.

Q. Did not he tell you he had taken the iron from a man who had taken it from the wall? - A. No, he did not.

ANN MYERS , junior, sworn.

I saw the prisoner take the iron off the wall adjoining to my father's shop, between six and seven in the evening, after he had left off work, and go round the side of the house with it, near the ruins of a fire; and I went and informed my mother.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. It was pretty dark at that time? - A. Not so dark but I could see it.

Q. How far was it from the ruins? - A. About as far as I am from you.

Prisoner. I leave my defence to my counsel.(The prisoner called seven witnesses, who gave him a good character).

GUILTY . (Aged 33.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned twelve months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-29
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

183. HENRY MARKS was indicted for p utting off, on the 14th of February , to one Levi Cowen , five pieces of false and counterfeit milled money, made to the likeness of a half crown, three pieces of false money to the likeness of a shilling, and nine pieces to the likeness of a sixpence, the same not being cut in pieces .


I know the prisoner. Last Sunday morning I met him, and he asked me if I wanted to buy any goods; I told him I did; with that he took me home with him to his house in Petticoat-lane, and shewed me nine sixpences, five half crowns, and three shillings; he asked me six shillings for them. I put my hand in my pocket and pulled out half a crown; I told him I had not money to purchase them; he told me to leave the half-crown, and bring the three shillings and sixpence before twelve o'clock, and I should have the goods; with that I went and acquainted Tipper, Mayne and Purnell, who are officers, of it. I returned and went up into his room about twelve o'clock, and the officers staid below.

Q. What passed between you and the officers before you went to the house? - A Mayne marked three shillings and a sixpence, and gave them to me to make up the money, and they searched me; I had nothing upon me but that three shillings and sixpence. When I came to the house, the officers staid below, and I went up into the room, and saw the prisoner with a child on his lap, and a woman paring potatoes; he asked me for three shillings and sixpence, and took out of his pocket a paper of the money, five half-crowns, nine sixpences, and three shillings; I gave him the three shillings and sixpence, and he gave it to the woman. When I entered the room there was a frying-pan on the fire, and some base metal in it; the officers then came in, and searched me, and found the five half-crowns, the nine sixpences, and three shillings; they searched the prisoner, and found three sixpences upon him; the woman was putting the three shillings and sixpence in her pocket as the officers came into the room, and they took it from her.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. This is all truth you have been telling us? - A. Yes.

Q. Was any body by when the prisoner said this to you? - A. No.

Q. It all depends on your credit? - A. Yes.

Q. You went again and found him above stairs, and he gave you the money? - A. Yes.

Q. Why were the officers not to go up with you? - A. Because, if they had come up, he would not have given me the money.

Q. You went up stairs, and the officers came up to you? - A. Yes.

Q. The officers had so good an opinion of you, they searched you before you went up? - A. Yes.

Q. How did they search you? - A. They searched all my pockets and waistcoat.

Q. Was it not possible for you to conceal this money that the officers might not find it? - A. No; I don't know where I was to put it but in my pocket.

Q. Could you not have put it in your bosom, or somewhere where the officers would not find it? - A. I am not such a lad as to do that.

Q.What are you? - A. A Jew, and sell lemons and oranges.

Q. Did you always give the same account of this transaction? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you give the same account to the Magistrate? - A. Yes.

Q. Did not you tell the Magistrate you got only seven shillings and sixpence. - A. Yes; I told the Lord Mayor seven shillings and sixpence; that was a mistake which I immediately corrected, as soon as the words were out of my mouth.

Q. Did you correct it till the officer told you? - A. As soon as I said seven, the officer said nine.

Q. The officer said nine, and then you said nine? - A. Yes.

Q. What was your reason for doing this? - A. For the public good.


I am an officer. On Sunday last, between ten and eleven o'clock, the last witness called at my house, and, in consequence of an information from him, I sent for more assistance. I went to Houndsditch and joined Tipper. I took three shillings and sixpence out of my pocket, and marked them, and gave them to the last with 1s. I stroked him down, to see that he had no more money. I did not put my hand in his pockets; he said he had no more, only two in halfpence; I did not feel the halfpence; then we went to a ginger-bread baker's in Petticoat-lane; we let the last witness go up first in order to complete his bargain; in the course of a minute we proceeded up two pair of stairs. As soon as we entered the room, we saw the last witness, the prisoner, and the woman; there was a frying-pan close by the fire, and a piece of metal in it of some sort; I then perceived something in the hand of the last witness; he put his left hand into his left coat pocket, I immediately caught hold of it, and out of his hand I took a paper containing five half-crowns, three shillings, and nine sixpences; I asked him where he got this money; he immediately said he had it from the prisoner; the prisoner did not say any thing; I put the money in my pocket; I am clear it is all counterfeit; I have been in the habit of apprehending persons with bad money; I then proceeded to search the prisoner, and in his left hand breeches pocket I found three base counterfeit sixpences; they are not finished, they want rubbing and putting in a liquid; they are not in a state for circulation. (The money was all produced, and handed to the Jury).

Q. Did you search the woman? - A. I did not, I was engaged with the prisoner and the last witness.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. These sixpences are not such as could be passed off? - A. Yes.

Q. You rubbed down the witness Cowen before you went to the house? - A. I did not put my hand in his pocket; I asked him particularly if he had any more money

Q. If he has sworn that you put your hand in his pocket, he has sworn that that is not true? - A. Certainly; for I did not put my hand in his pocket.

- PURNELL sworn.

I went with the last witness and Tipper, on Sunday morning, to the prisoner's lodging; we went up stairs, and Mayne searched the first evidence, and found some bad money in his pocket; I saw the woman putting something in her pocket; I went and took the three shillings and sixpence out of her hand; it was the same that Mayne had marked.

Mayne. There is one particular shilling I can swear to, it has a dent in it; I marked them all.

Q. How did you mark them? - A. With a sort of a scratch with a knife.

Q. You believe that three shillings and sixpence to be the same you gave to Cowen? - A. I do.

Court. What do you mean by saying these sixpences are not finished; they appear to have been in circulation? - A. They have been in circulation; they are not in the state they have been at first.

Mr. Ally. I understand that you are paid by the Mint for your trouble of attending here? - A. I don't know that I am; I have never been in the business before.

Q.(To Mayne). There is good pay, I believe, for attending here? - A. No, not sufficient for taking a man out of his business.

Prisoner's defence. I am now, in this present situation, an innocent man; I never saw the evidence before in my life till he came up stairs.

Q.(To Mayne). These things were in a paper? - A. They were in a brown paper, in the hand of the first witness.

Q. In what way were they put up; were they solded up? - A. No; they were all loose together.

For the Prisoner.


Q. Do you know Levi Cowen ? - A. To my sorrow, he is my unfortunate son.

Q. What is his general character? - A If I must speak the truth, I must speak against my son.

Q. Is your son fit to be believed upon his oath? - A. I would not take his oath for three halfpence; he has taken so many false oaths.(The prisoner called four other witnesses, who gave him a good character.)

Jury. (To Mayne). Q. Was it in the hearing of the prisoner that Cowen said he had the money of him? - A. Yes, certainly it was in the hearing of the prisoner.


Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-30
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

184. ANN CRAWLEY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 31st of January , one thousand seven hundred and twenty-eight iron screws; value 15s. eighteen thousand nails, value 1l. and three thousand other nails, value 35s. the property of William Knight and Richard Knight , in their dwelling-house .


I live in Foster-lane ; I am in partnership with William Knight, my father ; the prisoner was a servant in the family; I had missed a variety of articles, and seeing the prisoner frequently go out in an evening with her apron gathered up, as if she had something in it, my suspicions fell upon her. On Saturday evening, the 30th of January, seeing her go out in the manner I have described, I desired my brother to follow her, which he did, and, on his return, related what he had seen; I desired him to mark a variety of articles she was likely to take, to mark them on the back, which he did. The next day, being Sunday, in the morning before the family went to church, the parcels remained the same as they were in the evening, in the different holes of the shop; after returning from church, about one o'clock, there were several of them missing; the prisoner was the only person left at home that morning; in the evening, about six o'clock, it is the custom of my mother to send the servants to church, and thinking that the might take that opportunity of taking the goods, I went down in the shop in the dark, and disposed myself so as to have a full view of the prisoner, without being discovered myself; after waiting some time, the prisoner came down stairs, apparently with a heavy bundle in her hand, and went out, I immediately followed her, and before she had got ten or a dozen yards from the door, I overlook her, and taking hold of her arm, I desired to know what she had got; she made answer, what was that to me; I desired her to come back and let me see what it was, she refused; my brother coming up, took hold of her other arm; she then came back with us; taking the parcel from her, we discovered it to be very heavy; we then sent for Woodman, the constable; we examined the parcel, and it consisted of a variety of screws and nails that had been marked the preceding evening,(producing them): the constable examined her box and bed-chamber, in her presence, and found a quantity of nails concealed on a shall behind her bed, that had been marked the evening before; they were delivered to the constable, who has had them in his possession ever since.

Q.Does any body else sleep in this bed-room besides herself? - A. No; those found upon her were tied up in parcels; thousands, two thousands, and so on, as they were marked in the shop

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. There are a variety of articles in the indictment more than were found upon her? - A. There were some in the bed-room, and some found upon her.

Q. The parcels found in the bed-room, and those taken upon her, were nearly the same quantity? - A. Yes.

Q. She had an opportunity of taking them at different times? - A. I don't know; those in the bed-room that were marked, must have been taken between the time of marking them, and the time they were found.

Court. Do you know what number of parcels were marked? - A. No; I don't know what parcels in particular; my brother marked them.


I am brother to the last witness; I marked several parcels of nails on the Saturday; these are three of the parcels I marked; they were found in her apron; they are tacks, or nails; 3000 at the rate of 1s. a thousand, 7000 of larger nails, and about 3000 screws; there are about 15,000 of the larger nails, at the rate of 20d. a thousand; 12 gross of screws, worth 2s. a gross; the rest were found in her bed-room; I did not mark any of the screws.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. All these might have been taken at different times? - A. The screws might; the tacks were all taken at once.

- WOODMAN sworn.

These things have been in my possession ever since; they were taken from the prisoner.

Prisoner. I leave my defence to my Counsel.(The prisoner called three witnesses, who gave her a good character.)

GUILTY, Of stealing the goods to the value of 39s .(Aged 37.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-31
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

185. JAMES BUSHELL was indicted for feloniously stealing 19 Venetian window blinds, value 9s. and three canvas window blinds on rollers, value 3s. the property of George Welch , Jan. 22 .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys).


Q. Do you know Mr. George Welch ? - A. Yes: On the 23d of April last, I purchased the lease of a house for Mr. Welch, of the trustees of Mr. Topham, No. 73, Cornhill ; there were a vast number of fixtures to be taken at a fair valuation by Mr. Welch; I valued the fixtures; the blinds we missed were part of them; they were valued and appraised to Mr. Welch, and the property actually transferred to him.

Q. Do you know any thing yourself with respect to the blinds? - A. Sometime in July last, or beginning of August, we missed a number of fixtures from the house, and I informed Mr. Welch of it; among which were the Venetian and canvas blinds, mentioned in the indictment; three of the canvas blinds and four of the Venetian blinds were fixed, and the rest were lying loose in a back office; I was present when they were afterwards found, on the 25th of January, in the lodgings of the prisoner, in the house of a man of the name of Levi Hayes, in three different rooms, two of them up two pair of stairs, and one up three pair.

Q. Do you know from any thing the prisoner has told you, that he had any connexion with those rooms? - A. No: All the things mentioned in the indictment were found in that house.

Q. You have valued them at 30s. is that about the value? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. When did you agree for this house for Mr. Welch? - A. The 23d of April.

Q. Did you see the deeds executed? - A. I did.

Q. You missed the things as long ago as July? - A. July or August.

Q. That is upwards of six months; had you other people working in this house? - A. There were other people.

Q. They were found the 25th of July, at this house? - A. Yes.

Q. Any other person as well as the prisoner might have taken them to this house? - A. I don't know.

Q. From July to the time you found them, they might have been through many hands? - A. They might.

Q. They were not concealed? - A. They were rather concealed; the one was under the bed, the others behind a box.


I am a carpenter; I know the prisoner perfectly well; he was employed by my father as a journeyman carpenter , and set to work at the house of Mr. Welch, the 21st of July, and continued to work there till the latter end of November; I heard that the blinds were missing some time in the beginning of August; I heard the prisoner was taken up, and went with the constable Sapwell, and Mr. Fletcher, to the prisoner's lodging in St. Helen's; the constable told me it was his lodging; the landlord's name is Hayes; on first entering the second floor, we found some blinds against the window; we went into the bed-room, and there were concealed, under the bed, some canvas blinds on rollers; we then went into the three pair of stairs room, and behind a quantity of lumber, we found some more blinds; the prisoner was not with us, he was in custody.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You would not have employed this man if you had not had a good opinion of his honesty? - A. Certainly I had no bad opinion of him.

Q. They were lost in August, and not found till January? - A. Yes.

Q. In that time they might have gone through various hands? - A. Probably they might.

Q. On entering the first room, you saw some blinds immediately? - A. Yes.

Q. The others were in a work-shop? - A. Yes.

Q. When blinds want mending, is it not common to take them home to mend? - A. It is improper.

Q. It is not common? - A. I do not know.


I am foreman to Mr. Ponder: I was employed about the house of Mr. Welch.

Q. Was the prisoner at work there likewise? - A. He was; there were some blinds loose in the back room, and in the one pair of stairs the blinds were fixed; they were missed while the prisoner was at work there; I had the blinds from Mr. Sapwell's, and went with Mr. Fletcher to see whether they would fit the places in the one pair of stairs; I sitted the blinds to the places where they were suspected to be taken from in Mr. Welch's house, and they sitted exactly; I observed they had not been unscrewed, but torn off with a narrow chissel, or a screw-driver; the hinges of the blinds were bent, and there was the impression of the instrument in the bead of the sash frames they hung to; I believe the blinds I had at Sapwell's, and fitted to the places, were the blinds that were taken away.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You are a journeyman carpenter? - A. Yes.

Q. And so is the prisoner? - A. Yes.

Q. You would not, as a carpenter, take the blinds down in this way? - A. I should probably have unscrewed them.

Q. The prisoner staid in the service of Mr. Ponder, and worked in Mr. Welch's house till November? - A. I cannot say exactly.


I am a constable: I went to Levi Hayes' house with Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Ponder; I found the things in their presence; I did not know the prisoner before I had him in custody.

Q. Did you deliver the things to Palmer? - A. No; my man did; they are the same things that I took out of Hayes' house.


I live in Little St. Helen's; the prisoner lodged in my house; he had the second floor, and one room on the third floor, for occasional use; I was not at home when the house was searched.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. He had the occasional use of this third floor? - A. Yes.

Q. Other persons lodged in the house? - A. Yes, several.

Q. Did any body else use this third floor? - A. A poor old woman we gave it to almost out of charity, and another person.

Q. Did he lodge with you up to the time he was taken up? - A. Yes.

Q. What is his character? - A. Always just, sober, and upright.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Where there any other persons in your house who were in the service of Mr. Ponder? - A. No.

Mr.Knapp. Q. Do you know all Mr. Ponder's servants who are employed by him? - A. No.

Q.Did any of Mr. Ponder's servants come backwards and forwards? - A. Not that I know of; I have heard so.

Mr. Knowlys. (To Palmer). Look at those things. - A. These are the same things that I resitted to the window.

Q.From the observation you had had of them, and from the marks you saw upon the sitting, do you believe then to be the blinds that sitted the window? - A. I verily believe they are; they are bent hinges; these are the same blinds, no doubt of it.

Mr. Knapp. Q. They are common Venetian blinds, others might fit the windows? - A. A thousand to one if they did.

Court. Q. Have you any marks upon them that you can point out? - A. I can say no otherwise than they fitted the place; the hinges are torn off.

Court. Q. There is no mark but the violence that identifies them? - A. It has not marked the blinds but the beads.

Court. Q. Do the blinds suit the beads? - A. Exactly.(The prisoner called five witnesses, who all gave him a good character.)


Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-32

Related Material

186. THOMAS ATWELL was indicted, for that he, having been tried and convicted of grand larceny, at the assizes at Croydon, and adjudged to be transported beyond the seas for the term of seven years, was feloniously found at large, without any lawful cause, before the expiration of that term .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys).


I am keeper of the New Gaol, in Southwark; I was at the Croydon Assizes in July last; the prisoner was tried there; I have the certificate of his conviction, (producing it).

Q. Was he tried by the same name that he is now tried by? - A. Yes; Thomas Atwell

Q. Where did you get that certificate? - A. From Mr. Knapp, clerk of the assize; I saw Mr. Knapp sign it.

Mr. Ally. Q. This is a copy of it, I take it? - A. No; it is the original, (it is read).

Court. Q. Had you this man in custody before? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know that this is the same Thomas Atwell that was tried for stealing that trunk? - A. Yes; I have known him some years.

Q. You are sure it is the same man? - A. Yes.

Q. You had him in custody before his trial? - A. No; I took him in custody the 8th of August; I was present when he was tried at Croydon, and I am certain he is the same man.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Do you know what became of him afterwards? - A. I took him on the 29th of December; I went down to Reading, in Berkshire, in consequence of an information I received; I found him at the barracks at Knightsbridge.

Q.Not in any custody? - A. No.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You found him at the barracks? - A. Yes; I found him there as a soldier.

Q. He had enlisted, had not he? - A. Yes.

Q. He had a conditional pardon? - A. He had, I took it back to the Duke of Portland's office; I never broke the seal.

Court. Q. You understood he had enlisted? - A. In the Duke of York's regiment of foot guards; he was to go to join Colonel Maitland's regiment, to go to the West Indies.

- HILTON sworn.

I am servant to the keeper of the county gaol of Surrey: On the 9th of December, I was ordered,

by the gate keeper, and the keeper that is at present, to conduct the prisoner at the bar to Portsmouth, with a letter received from the War office directed to Lieutenant-Colonel Maitland, &c. &c. Portsmouth; that letter I delivered to the keeper, when I came back.

Court. (To Alport). Q. Have you that letter? - A. No; I carried it to the office as I was ordered.

Halton. I went with him to the Spread-Eagle, Gracechurch-street, and conducted him to Portsmouth; when I came there. I enquired for Colonel Maitland; I could get no intelligence of him; I applied to the Governor, and was informed, that the fleet had sailed, and he was gone with the fleet to the West-Indies. I was then directed to the Transport office, I found I could get no conveyance to deliver him; I then took a place for myself and him, to bring him back to London. I walked about with the prisoner, I had no place to lodge him in, he had no irons on, till about five o'clock; when he made an excuse that he wanted to go to the privy; the privy was in a small yard along-side the dwelling where we were, and I followed him at a little distance; and the door that let out into the yard was a door that opened towards me, in a narrow passage, he turned the door before me, and I walked gently after him, and when I turned the door I missed him; I thought he was gone to the privy, I looked there and found he had made his escape. I then proceeded round Portsmouth to discover him, but I could not hear any thing at all of him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. I believe the first tidings you heard of him was, that he was in the barracks at Knightsbridge? - A. No.

Q.Through what channel was it that you received information of him? - A. I had received information that he had enlisted as a soldier.

Q.Do you know of any letter he had written to the Duke of Portland, specifying that he had enlisted in the Duke of York's regiment? - A. I did not see the letter, I heard that there was one.

Court. In strictness of law I cannot ask the Jury to trisle with their oaths; this man is guilty of being at large; but when I find that that man immediately after enlisted, I shall direct the Jury to find him guilty; and offer my recommendation to his Majesty, that he may be sent to the West-Indies now; the fleet had failed, and he could not join it.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 23.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ROOKE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-33
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

187. SAMUEL, otherwise WILLIAM TRAMP , was indicted, for that he having been tried and convicted of grand larceny, and adjudged to be transported beyond the seas, for the term of seven years, was feloniously found at large without any lawful cause before the expiration of that term .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys).

JOHN OWEN sworn.

I am servant to Mr. Kirby, the keeper of Newgate; I was present at the trial of Samuel Tramp , he was tried here in April 1794.

Q. Is that the same man? - A. That is the same man.

Q.Have you the certificate of his conviction from Mr. Shelton, the officer of this Court? - A. Yes; that is his hand writing; I saw him sign it,(it is read).

Q. How long did he remain in Newgate after that? - A. I delivered him on board the hulks at Woolwich, on the 21st of October, 1794; he was brought back by an order from the Secretary of State, to Newgate, to be sent to serve his Majesty in the 60th regiment, that was going to the West Indies; I delivered him at Southampton, the 30th of October, 1795; I have the receipt of his delivery, (producing it).

Q.Did you ever see him again after that till he was brought in custody upon, this charge? - A. Never.

Court. Q. Who did you deliver him over to? - A. To Col. Robert Malcolm.


I am one of the officers belonging to Bow-street; I apprehended the prisoner at the bar, in Marygold court, in the Strand, on the 10th of February.

Q.Did you apprehend him by accident, or in consequence of an information? - A. In consequence of an information.

Prisoner's defence. I was conducted to Southampton, from Newgate, by Mr. Owen; he knows we might have made our escape several times, but I was glad to embrace the opportunity of serving his Majesty; and we went with the wrong convoy, and came back again, and went on board the right convoy; there was a galley went, and we were all put down below for forty-nine hours, without any thing to eat or drink; I was very ill sed by the captain and we put back, and they had leave to come on shore, and I did the same as any body would have been glad to have done, after they had been used in that manner.

Owen. I had a party of light-horse to escort him and forty-three others, to Southampton; I always took particular care of him, that he could not have escaped.

Court. Q. In what regiment were you on board?

Prisoner. In the 60th regiment; I was going to the West-Indies.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury; if you find him guilty, I shall recommend him to his Majesty's mercy.

GUILTY . Death .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-34

Related Material

188. WILLIAM CLARE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 5th of February , seven wether sheep, value 10l. the property of William Spain .


On Tuesday the 9th of February, I sent to the field for my sheep, and was told they were taken away on Friday the 5th.

Q. Where had you seen them before the 5th? - A. I had not seen them myself for a month; the keeper of the field is here who saw them on the 5th.


I look after the fields for Mr. Richard Garratt, and mind hay, or any thing that he has for me to do, in the parish of Willsden ; I saw the sheep on Friday the 5th of this month, and on the 6th in the morning they were gone.

Q.How came you to observe the sheep? - A. Because I used to look after them every day, and I think there were twenty in the first lot, before any was drafted off, that were marked, and nine in the other lot; those twenty were reddled almost all over more so than those nine were; Mr. Spair. and I, and his little boy, drawed ten of them away sometime before; I cannot say how long, it is sometime back; and then Mr. Spain sent for the remainder of that lot, and never let me know; and then there were two of these nine taken away; I sent Mr. Spain word, and he came and looked after them, but could not find them; and then, the 5th of this month, the seven were fetched away; I saw them in the afternoon.

Q. How many were there then? - A. Seven out of the nine.

Q. And how many out of the score? - A. They were all fetched away before.

Q. Then there were only seven sheep in the whole? - A. Only seven in the whole; I saw them in the afternoon, and on the 6th in the morning they were gone; I never saw them afterwards.

Q.Should you know them again? - A. Yes.

Q.Have you seen their skins? - A. I have seen one.

Q.Where did you see that skin? - A. On Monday, in Marlborough-street, and I have seen it since.

Q.Was it one of the seven skins? - A. Yes.


My father is a sheep salesman, in Smithfield-market; as I was going to market on Friday night, the 5th, about a quarter after six, I met a man with seven sheep of the Southdown kind, on Paddington-hill, just on this side the Red-lion, Westbourngreen, in the Harrow-road; he was a tall thin man, with a light coloured coat, very much of the appearance of the prisoner.

Q. How were the sheep marked? - A. I don't know the mark, there was a reddle along the back.

Q. Did you see any mark at all? - A. No; he was driving them up the hill very fast.

Q. Look at the prisoner? - A. I think he has very much the appearance of the man.

Examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. It was so dark you could not see the marks of the sheep, nor the countenance of the man? - A. No.

- FLEMING sworn.

I am a labouring man, the prisoner came to my dwelling-house on the 5th, in the evening, in North-Cumberland-mews, Mary-le-bonne parish.

Q. What time did he come to you? - A. I was in bed, it was about seven or eight o'clock, as near as I can tell; he asked my wife if I could go to market the next morning with some sheep; my wife said I was not satisfied with what I went with before.

Q. When did you see the prisoner? - A. At six in the morning.

Q. Do you know of your own knowledge that he came the over-night? - A. Yes; I heard him.

Q.Did you hear what he came about? - A. No; I cannot say I heard what he said; he left word he would come the next morning at four o'clock.

Q. Did he call the next morning at four o'clock? - A. No; at six.

Q. What passed? - A. I opened the window and looked out, and he asked me if I could go to market for him; he said my wife seemed to signify I thought it was too little money to go for; he said, he would give me 6d. more; I came down and harnessed the horse, and put it to the cart, and went along with him; I went to St. George's-row, and there we put seven skins in first, some straw over them, and put in six carcases; we came to Newgate-market; the prisoner carried the sheep into the market, and I stood with the cart; the seven skins I took to the skin-market, the top of St. John's-street; some the prisoner pulled out, and some I threw out; he drew the skins into

the yard by the legs, four one time, and three the other.

Q. Into whose yard? - A. Mr. Harwood's yard.

Q. Was Harwood there? - A. I did not see him, for I never got out of the cart at all, and then we both went away.


I live in St. John's-street, No.212; I am a sheep-skin salesman: On the 6th of February, I received seven skins in the name of Clare.

Q. What o'clock was it? - A. About half after seven or eight o'clock.

Q. Did you know Clare before? - A. Yes; I have paid him money before.

Q. How often have you dealt with him? - A. Four or five, or six times, I cannot positively say; I have sold skins by commission for a man of that name; they were delivered in the name of Clare, and as such, I sold them to a man of the name of Newsom, his man Ewings was with me.

Q. Look at the prisoner? - A. I believe I paid that man for the seven skins.

Q. Have you any doubt about it? - A. No; I think it was 3s. 3d a-piece.

Q. They were the same skins you sold? - A. Yes. the same I received.

Jury. Q. Were they booked? - A. Yes.

Q. What did you book them at? - A. Three shillings and three-pence.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys Q. You have dealt with this man before? - A. Yes.

Q. He is a beast-jobber, is not he? - A. I don't know.

Q. You sold these skins mixed with others? - A. Yes; we classed them, I believe there were seven or eight score in that lot.

Court. Q. Are you sure the skins you had of the prisoner were in that lot? - A. I believe they were in that lot.

Q. Don't you know they were in that lot? - A. They were in that lot.


I am servant to Mr. Newsom.

Q. Did you purchase any sheep skins on the 6th of February of Mr. Harwood? - A. Yes.

Q. How many? - A. In that lot the prosecutor found his in; I bought 184.

Q. Among the lot the prosecutor saw, were the skins you bought of Harwood? - A. They were in that lot.

Q. Did you show the lot to Mr. Spain? - A. No; Mr. Spain came on the Wednesday following that we bought them on Saturday the 6th, and saw two of them hanging to dry in Mr. Newsom's yard, after we had washed them, and he picked these out from the others.

Q. Where does Mr. Newsom live? - A. In Bermondsey-street, Southwark.

Q. What is Mr. Newsom? - A. A sellmonger.

Q. Were these two skins part of the lot you bought of Harwood? - A. Yes.


I am a butcher; I live with Mr. Dagg, in Upper Seymour-street, Portman-square: On the 5th of February, in the evening, I went to the public-house in St. George's-row, and in about five or ten minutes, the prisoner at the bar came in; he asked me if I would come into his place, and take a sheep skin off for him; I went in, and he had almost finished one; he gave me the knife, and I finished it; after that I dressed another; I told the prisoner at the bar I could not stay any longer, I must go; he had got one more dead, and two or three alive.

Q. Do you know exactly how many he had alive? - A. I cannot exactly say; he asked me if I would have any thing to drink for my trouble, which I refused; I came away, and left him in the place where he was at work.

Q.What is the prisoner? - A. I don't know; I don't think he is a butcher by trade; I don't think he knows the business.

Q. He has no shop as a butcher? - A. No, none at all; the place was a bit of a stable; there were no conveniencies; we were obliged to lift up every thing by strength.

Q. When did you inform; Mr. Spain of this? - A. I told one of the witnesses of it; the people at the public-house knew I did it; there were two or three in company knew I did it at the time.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. This was not all a secret transaction? - A. No; he came and drank at the public-house afterwards.

Q. He made no secret of it? - A. No.

Court. Were the sheep he had dressed done in a butcher-like manner? - A. No, not at all.

Jury. What breed were the sheep of? - A. Southdown, and an oker mark along the back.

Q.(To Spain.) Did you go to Mr. Newsom's yard? - A. Yes, on the Wednesday, at Bermondsey-street, in the Borough; I found two of the skins hanging on a rail; the first thing that they said was, they had bought them of Harwood.

Q. Were they your property? - A. Yes; they had my mark on them.

Q. Are you sure that these two skins were the skins of two of your sheep? - A. Yes; I am sure of it.

Q. Have you the least doubt upon the subject? - A. I have no doubt at all.

Q. Are you sure these were the sheep you lost between the 5th and the 6th? - A. Yes, I am sure

they are two of the skins; I went down on the Thursday; they said they could not be removed; they desired me to come on Saturday; I could not go on Saturday; I went on Sunday; they removed the skins, and found three more on the rails.

Q. Did you find any more? - A. No; I did not go any more; the justice said, two were sufficient.

Q.Are you sure these three were your property? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. You found these among a great number of others? - A. There were a great many on the rails.

Prisoner's defence. I know myself innocent of the crime I am accused of, and therefore I leave it to my counsel.

Mr. Knowlys. (To Harwood). The skins you sold to Mr. Newsom were in a lot of 184? - Yes; that was the fact.

Q. Did you see these two skins picked out by the prosecutor? - A. I saw one.

Q. Can you say that skin was one of the seven you bought of the prisoner? - A. I cannot swear that.

Q.(To Ewings.) Do you know whether those skins picked out of the parcel were part of the skins sold to Harwood? - A. No.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 29.)

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-35
VerdictNot Guilty > no prosecutor

Related Material

189. MARIA TERESA PHIPOE was indicted, for that she, on the 14th of April , in a certain dwelling-house, near the King's highway, in and upon John Courtoy did make an assault, putting him in fear and danger of his life, with intent the monies of the said John feloniously to steal .(No evidence was offered on the part of the prosecution.)


17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-36
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

190. JOHN AVERSHAW was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 17th of February , a man's cloth coat, value 2s. a kerseymere waistcoat, value 2s. a pair of leather breeches, value 3s. seven shillings and sixpence in monies numbered, and two pocket-pieces, value 1d. the goods and monies of Edward Hickin .


I am a musician , I play the violin; I live in the Borough, I am servant to Charles Welwin, an apothecary, in St. George's-Fields: On the 17th of February, between five and six o'clock, I was at the Coach-and-Horses, Newington-Green , in the parish of I slington; I shifted my cloathes in a private room; I left the cloaths I pulled off in the room; a coat, a waistcoat, and a pair of leather breeches; and seven shillings and sixpence, and two pocket-pieces, in the breeches pocket; there was a merry-making there, and I pulled them off to put on a jacket to dance; during my absence they were stolen; on my return, at six o'clock, the prisoner was in custody of the officers of the parish; they asked me if I could describe my cloaths, which I did; the cloaths were then produced to my view, and I found they were mine that I left there.

Q. Did you know any thing of the prisoner? - A. No.


I am a hair-dresser, I live at Islington: On Tuesday, between five and six o'clock, I went to Newington-Green; I was going into the Coach-and-Horses, and saw the prisoner come from the door with a bundle, and heard one or two people say,"brush now," which made me take notice of him; I saw him run down a lane adjoining to the place; I said to a person or two that were by, I believed he had stolen things, if they would pursue him with me, I would take him; I pursued him, and took him in the field; he was in a ditch, raking some dirt over the things; I took him about two yards from the place; as I got over the style, he rose up, and went from them; I pursued him and took him; I found a coat, waistcoat, and breeches; seven shillings in one of the breeches pockets, and sixpence, and two pocket-pieces, in the other; I took him and the cloaths to the Coach-and-Horses, and shewed them to Hicken; he said they were his property.

Prisoner. That man is known very well, he bears a bad character; and would swear any man's life away for five shillings.

Q. Do you know any thing of the prisoner? - A. No, I do not; I never saw him before to my knowledge.


I am a hair-dresser at Newington-Green; hearing that there was some dancing and tumbling going on at the Coach-and-Horses, I went to see it; I stood till I got cold, and then went into the yard to have a game at Dutch-pins, to warm me; while I was in the ground, Lumley said, there is a man gone out that has boned something.

Q. Did you understand the meaning of boning something? - A. Yes, thieving; upon that, he said, if some of you will pursue him we shall take him; I was the second after him; just as Lumley got over the style, he cried, "here he is," when I got to him, he had laid hold of him, which was about four yards from the ditch; me and another young man held him by the collar, while Lumley went to the ditch and took the property out; we then brought him back to the Coach-and-Horses, and delivered him into the hands of the constable; there was a coat, waistcoat, and breeches; as the young man and

I held the man by the collar, the breeches gingled; and Lumley said, there is something in the pocket, let us take it out, left it should fail out; and he took out seven shillings and sixpence, and two pocket-pieces. (The things were produced in Court, by the constable, and deposed to by the prosicutor).

Constable. I searched the prisoner, I think he had two halfpence, and a sarthing, and a very good watch; I returned the watch, the Magistrate bid me take it from him, and leave it to be advertised; it is now at Hatton-Garden.

Prisoner's defence. I heard there was a thing going on as a mountebank, jumping and dancing, and tumbling and jumping in sacks, I went to see it; and as I was going home, over the field, these men came and stopped me, and said, I was the man; I never was nigh the ditch, and they found nothing upon me.)(The prisoner called one witness, who gave him a good character.

GUILTY . (Aged 20.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-37

Related Material

191. THOMAS DAVENPORT was indicted for that he, on the 25th of January , in and upon Ann Thacker , did make an assault, and her the said Ann, did ravish and carnally know against her will .

(The case was opened by Mr. Peat.)

(The witnesses were examined apart at the request of the prisoner).

ANN THACKER called in.

Mr. Justice Lawrence. Q. How old are you? - A. I was eleven last New year's day.

Q. Do you know what will be the consequence of your not telling that which is true upon your oath? - A. I should go to a bad place.

Q. What do you mean by going to a bad place?(The question was repeated several times, and the child hesitated a long while, during which time Mr. Justice Rooke came into the Court).

Mr. Justice Rooke. Q. Did you ever hear of God Almighty? - A. Yes.

Q.Do you think he would be pleased or angry with you, if you tell that which is false? - A. He will be angry with me.

Q. And what if you tell truth? - A. He will be pleased.

Q. Do you fear him? - A. Yes.

Q. How old are you? - A. Eleven last New-year's day.(She was sworn).

Q. You are turned of eleven? - A. Yes.

Q.What part of the house is the room you sleep in? - A. In the garret.

Q.Where does your father live? - A. In Bedford-bury ; he is a publican.

Q. Who sleeps in the next room to you? - A. Nobody.

Q. Does any body sleep on the same floor? - A. No; only the maid; the sleeps in the same room.

Q.Did the maid sleep in the same bed? - A. Yes.

Q. What night did this happen? - A. On the Monday morning.

Q. Do you know the day of the month? - A. I don't know.

Q.Was the maid in bed with you when this happened? - A. No; she had got up and left me.

Q.Do you know what time she left you? - A. No; I was asleep.

Q. What time did you awake? - A. Between eight and nine o'clock.

Q.Did you hear any noise in the room before the matter you are going to speak of? - A. No.

Court. Q. How many mornings is it ago? - A. I believe about four Mondays; this soldier came up between eight and nine o'clock.

Q. Do you know the prisoner? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see him before? - A. Yes.

Q. Had he been long in the house? - A. No.

Q.Did he live there? - A. He was quartered in the house.

Q.How long had he been quartered there? - A. I cannot tell rightly.

Q. On this Monday morning what have you to say against him? - A. He came up stairs.

Q.What did he do? - A. He hurt me very much.

Q. You were asleep and found him hurting you very much? - A. Yes.

Q. Are you sure it was that man? - A. Yes.

Q. How did he hurt you; you must tell the truth; don't be ashamed; where did he hurt you? - A. Here, (pointing her hand to her private parts).

Q. How did he hurt you there; what with, his hand, or what; don't be ashamed? - (Hesitates).

Q. Don't be ashamed; tell me what he hurt you with? - A. With his cock.

Q. What did he do with it? - A. He put it in me.

Q. Did he put it into your body? - A. Yes.

Q. Are you sure of that? - A. Yes.

Q. How long did he stay there? - A. Not long.

Q. How came he to take it out again? - A. Because I cried very much.

Q. Did you feel any thing come from him? - A. Yes.

Q. What sort of thing was that, wet or dry? - A. Wet.

Q. Was it warm or cold? - A. Warm.

Q. This is the account you give of the man? - A. Yes.

Q. You cried very much? - A. Yes.

Q. What did the soldier do then? - A. He went down stairs.

Q. Did he run down? - A. No; walked down.

Q. Did any body come up to you? - A. No.

Q. How soon did you get up after this? - A. I got up directly.

Q.When did you tell this to any body? - A. Two days after.

Q.Why did you not tell it directly? - A. Because I had a bad mother-in-law.

Q.How do you mean a bad mother-in-law? - A. She used to use me very ill.

Q. How did she use you very ill? - A. She used to beat me.

Q.Did you suppose she would beat you if you told this? - A. I don't know.

Q. Who did you first tell it to? - A. To a woman in the house; her name is Mrs. Duncan.

Q. How came you to tell it to her? - A. Because she asked me.

Q. Where is she now? - A. She is not here.

Q. Why is not she here? - A. Because we could not find her; she told it to my father, and he questioned me about it as soon as he heard of it, the same day.

Q. Did you feel any pain from what had happened? - A. Yes, directly.

Q. And did that pain continue? - A. Yes.

Q. When did you feel yourself ill; or did you feel yourself ill at all? - A. A little while afterwards.

Q. Did your father send any body to you; did any surgeon examine you? - A. Yes.

Q. Who was the surgeon? - A. James Gale .

Q. When did he examine you? - A. I don't know rightly what day.

Q. The same day your father heard of it? - A. No, the day afterwards.

Q. Remember, upon your oath, you are bound to tell the truth; did ever any other man besides the prisoner use you in this way? - A. No; no other man.

Q. You are positive it was the prisoner who used you so? - A. Yes.

Q. You found him in your body? - A. Yes.

Q. Was he in your body at the time something warm came from him? - A. Yes.

Prisoner. Q. You say I came up to bed to you that Monday morning? - A. Yes.

Q.You was asleep when I came up? - A. Yes.

Q. And you saw me come up the stairs? - A. Yes.

Q. Your Lordship hears what she says; what did I do to you then? - A. You used me very ill.

Q. Did I say any thing to you? - A. No.

Q. What did I do to you? - A. He did the same as I have told you.

Court. Q. Did you see him come up stairs? - A. No.

Prisoner. I would be very glad if you would examine her to that; she says, she saw me come up stairs, and she says I waked her.

Court. Q. Did you see him come up stairs? - A. I did not; I knew nothing of him till I found him upon the bed with me.


Examined by Mr. Peatt. I am a surgeon: I was sent for by Robert Thacker, on the 27th of last month, to meet him at Bow-street.

Be so kind as to state distinctly what you know of this? - A. By the request of Mr. Justice Addington, I went into a private room to examine the child; that is the child; she is under my hands now.

Q. What was the result of her examination? - A. I examined her, and found the exterior parts very much inflamed.

Court. Q. What was that inflammation owing to? - A. There was a very great discharge; I should suppose owing to perforation; on the further examination, I found the neck of the virgina very much lacerated, and a very great discharge; as to the complexion of the discharge, I was not positive whether it was venereal or not, at that time; to confirm my opinion, I went over to the Brown Bear , where the prisoner was confined, to examine him also; I found a strong ghonorrhoea from the urethra; I have had the child under my care ever since.

Q. Has she any symptoms of this venereal now? - A. She is under a mercurial course now, and a strong discharge upon her; she has the gonorrhcea upon her at this time.

Q. You examined this child; were the appearances you saw, the effect of violence from some person or other? - A. No doubt but some puncture was the occasion of that inflammation; I have not the least doubt of it.

Q. Was the hymen destroyed? - A. At the first examination I could not be positive, being dark at night.

Q.Are you quite certain from your professional knowledge, and that knowledge applied to the observation of that child, are you quite clear that that child had been penetrated by some person? - A. Not

the least doubt of it, because, passing the finger up the passage, I found it extremely inflamed; the second time I examined her at my own house, I passed my finger half an inch or an inch, and found it very much inflamed; the hymen was destroyed in some measure, but whether from the puncture, or the acrimony of the discharge, I cannot say.

Court. Q. Have you been long a surgeon? - A. About sixteen years.

Q. Have you had much experience in this way? - A. I mostly practise surgery.

Q. Then I will ask you a question for the sake of the public, and enlightening the public mind upon this subject; is it possible for a man, having a venereal taint of this sort, to receive any benefit from connexion with a child? - A. It is an extremely false idea.

Court. This idea cannot be too well understood, because many poor miserable wretches have that notion? - A. I should suppose quite the reverse, because any thing that irritates the penis must inflame it and encrease the discharge.

Court. That has been the uniform answer of every surgeon that I ever heard.

Mr. Peatt. My Lord, I understand that the father, at the instance of the mother-in-law, was arrested, a day or two before, and he is now retired, from fear of being arrested; he was here this morning.

Court. If any person offers violence attending here, the Court will instantly take notice of them; the man is perfectly safe here if you can find him, and every man is in a Court of Justice.

Mr. Peatt. The woman that she told it to is kept out of the way also.

Court. (To the child). Q. How many days after he had used you ill was he taken up? - A. The Wednesday after.


Examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. Did the child say any thing to you? - A. I heard what she said before the Magistrate, that is all I know.

Q. Do you know where Robert Thacker , the father, is now? - A. He was here this morning.

Court. Why is he gone away? - A. I cannot say.

Prisoner. (To Gale). Whether you are positive sure that I had the foul disease? - A. You recollect I came to you at the Brown Bear , and asked you if you had been in the habit of being with bad women, and you said, yes; my Lord, I took his penis in my hand, and pressed it, upon which there was a considerable discharge.

Prisoner. There was some little discharge.

- MAPHAM sworn.

On the 27th of last January, I had some business called me to the other end of the town, by St. Martin's work-house; some people were crying out stop him, stop him; I saw the prisoner running, and a number of people after him; he said, for God's sake don't stop me; I took him to Bow-street, and he was committed for trial.

Prisoner's defence. The very morning she swears to, I was upon guard; I got up as soon as day-break, and called my comrade out of bed to tie my hair; I got up between seven and eight; I got my accoutrements; I stopped at the Horse-Guards till nine, and then I went to fall into the ranks in full uniform to guard.

For the Prisoner.


I am a soldier in the first regiment of Foot Guards, the prisoner belongs to the same regiment; I tied his hair between seven and eight in the morning; I was quartered in the same house with him.

Court. (To the child). Was it day-light when you saw him? - A. Yes.

Court. (To Dixon). It was between seven and eight when you tied his hair? - A. Yes; I tied his hair, and he went out to go upon guard, and then I went to bed; I was not upon guard that day.

Q. You don't know whether he went out of the house or not? - A. I don't know, only that he went out of the room in order to go upon his duty.

Prisoner. Q. Did you hear the girl cry out that morning. - A. I did not.

Court. Q. What room did you tie his hair in, up stairs or down stairs? - A. Up two pair of stairs.

Court. Q. You went to bed again; did you go to sleep? - A. I cannot say whether I did or not.

Court. Q. There is a garret over the two pair of stairs? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. You sleep in the same room as the prisoner-A. Yes.

Q. In the same bed? - A. Yes.

Q. What o'clock did you tie his hair up? - A. Between seven and eight, to the best of my knowledge.

Q. Do you know the other soldier that is here as a witness? - A. I have seen him as a soldier, that is all I know of him.


I am a soldier in the first regiment of Foot Guards; I was quartered at the Red-lion, in St. Martin's-court. On Monday, the 25th of January, I was drinking at the Horse Guards with the prisoner a few minutes before nine in the morning, and he appeared to me to be perfectly sober; he came from towards St. Martin's-lane, I met him at Charing-cross, and went down with him to the Horse Guards.

Cross-examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. How far is

Bedfordbury from Charing-cross? - A. I don't know.

Court. The Gentlemen of the Jury know very well how far it is; it cannot be five minutes walk.


I am a soldier in the first regiment; I was drinking with the prisoner on Monday, the 25th of January, between eight and nine, we had two pots of beer, and two slices of bread and cheese; the clock struck nine as we came out. I suppose we could not have been in more than half an hour.

Court. What leads you to remember that? - A. I was going down for a bed to Westminster; we were both for guard that morning.

Q. Who drank with you? - A. Busby and the prisoner.

Q. You had two pots of beer? - A. I think it was two; I don't think we had any more.

Q. Where did you meet the prisoner? - A. Coming up to the armory-room in the Tilt-yard; Busby was with him.

Q. When did you hear of the prisoner being taken up? - A. On the Wednesday I went up to Bow-street, to know what was the matter, as I had known him a great while, and knew him to be a man of a very good character.

Q. Did you here the story there? - A. No.

Q. Do you know what time the child swears he was with her? - A. No; I never heard.


I am serjeant of the first regiment; I have known the prisoner ever since he has been in the regiment, two years and nine months, he has behaved himself extremely well ever-since; he was upon the Continent one part of the time, and behaved himself extremely well.

Q. Do you know any thing in particular of him on Monday the 25th? - A. He mounted guard upon the parade, at St. James's Park, at half past nine that morning.

Officer. My Lord, the father of the child is come now.


Q. Where have you been this morning? - A. I have been in Court, but was informed, being a little embarrassed in my affairs, that an officer was ready to arrest me as soon as I had given evidence here.

Mr. Justice Rooke. You are perfectly safe in coming here; and you shall be protected in going home.

Thacker. I am the father of the child; she was eleven year old last New-year's-day; the prisoner has been quartered upon me three or four months, I cannot justly say to the time, as I have not the billet about me; with respect to his behaviour while with me, I had not much reason to find saul, I thought him a quiet kind of man; and I employed him to do little matters for me, and gave him victuals, at different times.

Q. Do you know any thing of what passed between him and your daughter on Monday the 25th of January? - A. I was out of town; and when I returned, on Wednesday evening, I was told my child wanted to see me; she told me she was hurt, by the prisoner, upon the bed; that she was ordered by her mother-in-law to go to bed that night with the maid, she used to sleep alone; that she fell asleep after the maid got up, and this man came up stairs, and came to bed to her; that she cried out, and nobody heard her.

Q. When was this? - A. On Wednesday in the evening; I went that evening to Bow-street.

Q. She had not been to Bow-street before that? - A. No.

Q. You had another soldier in the house? - A. Yes.

Q. What is his name? - A. Dixon.

Q. Have you any reason to think any other man has used your child in this way? - A. Not at all.

Q. Where is the maid servant? - A. I cannot find her; I have been endeavouring to find her this two or three days, but could not find her; she has been gone away this month, I believe; she went away immediately after this affair.

Q. Did you turn her away, or did she go away? - A. She was turned away by my wife.

Prisoner. I wish your Lordship to ask Dixon what the girl was turned away for?

Witness. For being in liquor, my Lord.

(Dixon called in again.) Court. Q. Why was that maid servant turned away from Thacker's house? - A. I don't know.

Q.(To Robert Thacker.) Your child complains she is harshly treated by her mother-in-law, I hope you will take care of her; it is known in Bow-street, and it is known here; and it will be very necessary for her safety that she should treat the child better in future. - A. I have applied to an Attorney to draw up articles of separation between us, upon this very subject.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 26.)

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-38

Related Material

192. WILLIAM LEE was indicted (with SARAH CHANDLER , not yet in custody) for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of John Dingwall and Gerard Baillieu , about the hour of nine in the night of the 3d of December , and burglariously stealing a brilliant diamond star pin, value

92l. a pair of round brilliant diamond bracelets, strung with pearl, value 1015. 14s. a pair of brilliant diamond ear-rings, value 173l. anothe brilliant diamond star pin, value 159l. an octagon ring, studded with diamonds, value 8l. an octagon ring, set with rose diamonds, value 3l. a pearl buckle ring, value 18s. a pearl ring, value 28s. another pearl ring, value 36s. a watch, with a gold case, value 8l. two gold watch chains, value 4l. a pair of gold ear-rings, value 48s. two gold seals, value 25s. a brilliant diamond necklace, value 200l. two pair of brilliant diamond ear-rings, value 250l. three brilliant diamond flowers, value 390l. a diamond fausse montre, value 40l. a brilliant diamond hoopring, value 4l. 13s. an oblong brilliant ring, value 8l. 10s. another oblong brilliant diamond ring, value 9l. a round brilliant ring, with single brilliant in the middle, value 10l. 5s. a round brilliant ring with hair in the middle, value 7l. 4s. a brilliant urn ring, value 4l. 10s. a pair of long brilliant bracelets, value 33l. 15s. a garter ring, value 40s. an octagon ring, with a rose diamond urn, value 3l. two pair of enamelled bracelets, studded with diamonds, value 6l. 10s. a rose diamond and enamelled ring, value 3l. 13s. 6d. a diamond star, value 16l. a pair of pearl bracelet lockets, value 3l. 13s. 6d. a pearl cross, value 3l. 4s. a pearl trinket, value 2l. 12s. 6d. a pearl locket, value 3l. a round pearl ring, with hair in the middle, value 40s. a pearl buckle ring, value 18s. a pearl ring, with a motto, value 28s. a pearl enamelled ring, value 36s. a pearl puzzle ring, value 10s. 6d. an oval ring value 30s. 6d. two gold watch chains, value 8l. 18s. 6d. two enamelled watch chains, value 10l. 5s. three gold watch chains, value 6l. 5s. a gold neck chain, value 34s. a gold cornelian chain, value 50s. three other gold chains, value 4l. 15s. a gold gorget, value 30s. a gold anchor, value 28s. a gold locket, with hair in the middle, value 20s. another gold locket, with a blue composition, value 30s. three pair of gold ear-rings, value 5l. 6s. six pair of gold earrings, value 9l. another pair of gold ear-rings, value 20s. three gold seals, value 3l. two pair of gold bracelets, value 22s. three brilliant diamond urn rings, value 39l. a brilliant and ruby ring, value 16l. 16s. a brilliant and ruby diamond shirt pin, value 4l. a pair of diamond and enamelled bracelets, value 3l. a gold fillagree chain, value 40s. a fillagree chain coloured, value 32s. and an ivory snuff-box, set with diamonds, value 50l. the property of the said John Dingwall, David Pratt Vernon and Gerard Baillieu , in the said dwelling-house .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys).

(The witnesses were examined apart at the request of the prisoner).


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. I am a jeweller , in partnership with John Dingwall, and David Pratt Vernon , No. 9. St. James's-street .

Q. Had you any person in your service of the name of Sarah Chandler? - A. Yes.

Q. When did she come into your service; how long before this robbery? - A. It might be somewhere about six weeks, as near as I can recollect.

Q. When was this robbery effected? - A. The third of December.

Q. What time on that day did you leave the house? - A. A little after seven o'clock in the evening.

Q. Was it dark at that time? - A. Yes.

Q. Who are the partners that live in this house? - A. John Dingwall , and myself.

Q. Does Mr. Vernon live in the house? - A. He does not.

Q. You and Mr. Dingwall sleep there? - A. Yes.

Q. What part of the house were these diamond articles kept in? - A. In a back room on the ground floor, in an iron closet; the ready-made diamond work was always kept there.

Q. How lately before you left the house had you seen them? - A. About half an hour before I left the house; when I left the house, they were in the show-glass.

Q. Where is the show-glass? - A. In our front shop; it was always customary to lock them in the iron closet at eight in the evening.

Q. Was Mr. Dingwall at home when you went out? - A. Yes; Mrs. Baillieu went out before me.

Q. Was there any other servant in the house besides Sarah Chandler ? - A. No.

Q. At what time did you return? - A. A little after two in the morning.

Q. The robbery had been discovered before you returned? - A. Yes; by Mr. Dingwall.

Q. Do you know yourself who recommended this Sarah Chandler to your service? - A. It was a person of the name of Gosser that gave me that character; we have not been able to find her since.

Q. When you returned, was Sarah Chandler at home? - A. No; nor I have never seen her since.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. This house is the property of you and your partners? - A. No; we hire it from Mr. Dingwall.

Q. Who pays the rent to Mr. Dingwall? -We three.

Q. And it is out of the firm in your partnership business that you pay the rent? - A. Yes.

Q. Mr. Vernon contributes his proportion to pay the rent? - A. Yes he does.

Q. Mr. Vernon lives in general out of the house? - A. He does.

Q.Perhaps sometimes he sleeps in this house? - Not since he has been married.

Q. The rent is paid, out of the funds of the partnership? - A. Yes.

Q.This woman had lived with you about five weeks? - A. Thereabouts.

Q. She has absconded, and never been heard of since? - A. No.

Q. You did not know the prisoner before? - A. No.

Q. How long has Mr. Pratt Vernon been married? - A. About a year, and he and his wife live in James's-street, Covent-garden.

Court. Q. Have you any other partners in the trade besides you three? - A. No other partners.

Court. Q. Not sleeping partners who have an interest in the trade? - A. None.

Court. Q. When was the robbery committed? - A. In 1795, the 3d of last December.

Mr. Knapp. It is stated in the record 1793.

Court. That is not at all material, you know.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Have you any partners besides Mr. Baillieu and Mr. Pratt Vernon? - A. None.

Q. How late were you in the house the day you sustained this loss? - A. At eight o'clock in the evening, on Thursday the 3d of December; at a quarter past eight, I left the house, after having locked up these articles in the iron closet.

Court. Q. The diamond articles that had been in the show-glass? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you leave any other articles in the show-glass? - A. Not in that show-glass.

Q. How is this closet secured? - A. With a strong iron door, perfectly secure; the key of which we hang up in an inner room, which we call our jewel room; I hung up that key and double locked the door of that room; I then told the maid-servant, Sarah Chandler, that I was going out.

Q. Had you or not given her information as a fact, what time you should return? - A. I did, about nine o'clock.

Q. Were there any other servants left in the house? - A. None, besides Sarah Chandler .

Q. What was the time you intended to stay out? - A. No longer than an hour.

Q. Did you leave any other person in the house besides this Sarah Chandler? - A. No other.

Q. How long was it before you returned? - A. An hour.

Q. When you returned, what happened? - A. I knocked several times at the door, and could not get admittance, nor could not learn any thing of the servant; finding I could not get in, I went away, and returned again about eleven o'clock; there was nobody in the house; I then got two men to help me to open the door.

Q. Have you ever seen that servant from that time to this? - A. Never.

Q. When you got in, in what state did you find your property? - A. The rooms I found in the same state I left them, except when I went into the front room, one of the covers of the show glass had been turned, and the front glass broke; I missed some gold ear-rings and other articles which we did not lock up in our iron closet.

Q. Were all the articles, or only a part of them, contained in the show-glass? - A. In that tray of the show-glass were all the articles.

Q. Was any thing left behind in any of the other show-glasses? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you afterwards go to the jewel-room? - A. Yes; I went to the jewel-room, unlocked it, and found the key hanging there.

Q. Are there more keys than one to this jewel-room? - A. There are two doors to that room, and both were locked when I went in, and both were locked when I returned.

Q. Has your partner, Baillien, any key of those places? - A. He has a key belonging to the other door, but not the door that I entered at: I then took down the key and went to the iron closet, and found the diamond articles all gone out of that tray.

Q. Have you seen the list, contained in this indictment, of the articles? - A. I have.

Q. I will read them to you; was there a brilliant diamond necklace? - A. Yes.

Q. That is laid at the value of 200l, odd? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Is that the value of it? - A. That is our prime cost to us.

(Mr. Knowlys here went through those articles in the indictment, which were afterwards produced).

Q. Did you see Mr. Baillieu's escrntore when you came back? - A. No.

Q.Did you see what had become of that, or what had been done to it any time after that? - A. Not till three or four days after the robbery happened.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. Your other partners had gone out about seven in the evening? - A. Yes.

Q. You staid at home to take care of the house? - A. I staid till eight.

Q. You went out upon business? - A. Yes.

Q. There was a vast deal of property in your house? - A. Yes.

Q.Therefore it is usual for one or other of the partners to endeavour to be always at home? - A.

We have frequently gone out and left only a servant, when the things are so properly secured as they were.

Q. Is it not your custom to leave one of the partners in the house? - A. Yes.

Q. The information you gave to the maid-servant was the only information you gave? - A. Yes.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. I am a jeweller and silversmith, in Dame-street, Dublin.

Q. Did you see the prisoner at the bar at any time, and when? - A. I saw him either the 16th or 17th of December last, he called at my house with two men, one of the name of Willet, a jeweller, who lives in my neighbourhood, and an auctioneer's clerk, whom I also know.

Q. What is his name? - A. I don't know, I never heard his name.

Q. What was his business? - A. They introduced this man to me, telling me he had a number of diamonds to dispose of; that I was a fit man to purchase them; the appearance of the man made me suspect he had not come by these diamonds property; I desired him to leave the diamond pin, which he had with him, and I would consult some person better acquainted with the value of it, which, upon consulting with those men, he consented to do.

Q. At this time did any conversation pass between you and him? - A. Nothing more than the price that he asked for the pin, which was 150l.

Q. When did you see him again? - A. The party went away then, and I went to consult a friend of mine, Mr. Osborne; the prisoner returned in half an hour, to have my valuation; I begged him to walk into the parlour; and I told him, I hoped he would excuse my suspecting that he did not come by these things property; and that if it turned out otherwise, I should apologize to him, or something to that effect; I told him, it was my duty to investigate the business, and that he should explain in what manner he came by the article; at this, he seemed a good deal hurt; and said, if I did not chuse to purchase the pin, to give it back to him; which I refused to do; he then said, his wife had lived servant to the Princess Mary, Elizabeth and Sophia; I am not positive as to the three names; but I am to Mary and Elizabeth; he said, they were given to her for her services, that diamond pin, and others, which, he said, he had; I thought the story an extraordinary one; and, he said, there could be no doubt of it; and that he had a quantity of diamonds coming over from the other side; by which, I understood, he meant England; which he had recovered by an action of trover, since his wife's death; I told him, this story would not satisfy me, and requested him to point out some one in this country to give him a character, otherwise I could not part with it; upon which, he mentioned the name of a Mr. Lee, that keeps a music shop in Dame-street; I went to Mr. Lee, to enquire his character, and he said, after some time recollecting himself, that he had known a man of that name, that had lived a waiter at Deally's club-house.

Court. Q. What did the prisoner say his name was? - A. Lee; I mentioned the circumstance of bringing the pin to me.

Q. Had you any further conversation? - A. I told him, that the man he had reserved me to, had given me rather an indifferent opinion of him; that it was my duty to send for an Alderman, which I did; and gave him in custody to Alderman Twiddey.

Q. Should you know that pin again if you were to see it? - A. Yes; the Alderman desired I should lodge examinations against him, which I did; he lives within a few doors of where I live.

Q.Was the prisoner committed in consequence of those examinations? - A. Yes; he was taken to prison, under the custody of Richard Warren. (The pin was produced). This is the pin I received of the prisoner; I am positive of it; I put my mark upon it, and it has it upon it now.

Mr. Dingwall. It is a tripple star brilliant pin, estimated in the indictment at 192l. which it cost us.

Q.(To Mr. Moore). Where was this lodged? - A. I deposited it with Alderman Twiddey.

Q. Is he here? - A. No; Alderman Twiddey sealed up the diamond, in my presence, and lodged it in the national bank.

Court. Q. You received it from the Alderman again, and are sure it is the same you received from the prisoner? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You told my Lord, and the Gentlemen of the Jury, that you are a jeweller in Dublin? - A. Yes; and a silversmith.

Q. I believe Dame-street is as public a street as any in Dublin? - A. I have a great many customers.

Q. It is an open shop? - A. Yes; sitted up exactly as they are here in London; I am not so much in the diamond way, as the silver line.

Q. The prisoner produced the pin to you; he did not come by himself? - A. No.

Q. He came with two persons whom you knew? - A. Yes.

Q. One was Mr. Willet? - A. Yes; he is a jeweller; his wife keeps a milliner's shop.

Q. Is he a man of respectability? - A. No.

Q. The other person is, what? - A. An auctioneer's clerk.

Q. Your suspicions were awakened, and therefore you desired to have reference to some person that he knew, in your country? - A. Yes.

Q.Was that person that he referred you to, the only person he referred you to? - A. Yes.

Q. Did he refer you to a person of the name of Swarn? - A. He did not.

Q. Who did he refer you to? - A. A Mr. Lee, who keeps a music-shop in Dame-street.

Q. You know Mr. Lee very well? - A. Yes, intimately, and could have relied upon any thing he said.

Q. You left the prisoner in your house? - A. Yes; under the care of my young man.

Q. And when you came back again, you found him there? - A. Yes.

Q. Is your young man here? - A. He is not.

Q. The person did give you some account that he knew him some time ago, as a waiter at a club-house? - A. Yes; four years ago.

Q. And the man gave you a true information that he did know him? - A. Yes; Mr. Lee described the man, and it was certainly the same.

Q. So that it was not a false account that he gave of himself? - A. It was not.

Court. Q. He told you he had other diamonds? - A. Yes.

Q. That was not after the time that your suspicions had been awoke? - A. No, it was before; for my reason was, to endeavour to get the whole of the diamonds.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. I am the keeper of the Bridewell at Dublin.

Q. Was the prisoner at the bar committed to your custody? - A. He was.

Q. How long was he in your custody? - A. About a week.

Q. Did any thing particular pass between you and the prisoner at the bar, while he was in your custody? - A. There was.

Q. How long had he been in your custody before this happened? - A. Four or five days, on or about the 20th or 21st of December, as I was locking up the prisoner's door, the prisoner met me on the stairs, and he told me he was very much frightened about Alderman Twiddey not taking bail about the robbery; I told him I was very sorry for it; do you recollect, says he, you were talking last night of getting the keys of your prison altered; I told him I did very well; then he asked me if I knew how Hamilton Rowan made his escape; I told him I did; don't you know, Mr. Warren, says he, I have a woman's face? you have, sir, says I; he asked me what was my place worth a year? I told him 40l. a year; says he, Mr. Warren, I will make you a present of 6 or 700l. worth of value in diamonds, if you will let me escape; he pulled a prayer-book out of his pocket, and he kissed the book; he swore he would tell no one on the face of the earth how he made his escape; and as I was a newly-appointed jailer, no notice would be taken of me; the next day he called me over to the window.

Q. Did you appear to refuse this or yield to it? - A. I seemed to agree to him in every thing; says he, do you recollect, Mr. Warren, what I was talking to you about last night? I do, sir, says I, he called for pen and ink and paper, and wrote down the value of different articles; he made mention of different articles upon a piece of paper, which he gave to his father.

Mr. Ally. Did you see him give it to him? - A. Not at that time; he sent for his father.

Court. Did you see his father? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see him give it to his father? - A. I did; and at the bottom of the note, with speed; the father and mother brought the property that evening.

Court. What did they bring? - A. A diamond star pin, a pair of diamond ear-rings, a watch, with a gold chain, and some pearl rings, and a gold watch broke.

Q. Where did you deliver the articles that the father gave you? - A. I gave them to Alderman Twiddey; I put my mark upon them.

Q.Should you know them again if you were to see them? - A. I should; (they are produced).

Court. Who gave them to you after the father and mother had brought them? - A. The prisoner at the bar, between ten and eleven that night; when the father and mother gave him the property, he told me, I had them for you, says he; he called me into a room, and put them out of his pockets; says he, here is a diamond star pin worth 300 guineas, a pair of brilliant ear-rings worth 200 guineas, two diamond rings worth 20 guineas, a pair of gold earrings, I really forgot what the value he set upon that was, a gold watch broke, he said I could get it very easily repaired, worth ten guineas; I gave some directions to Thompson, his bed-fellow, and Lee hid himself in the kitchen; I sent Thompson in to look for him; he told Thompson he would not go to bed that night.

Q. Did you hear him say that to Thompson? - A. I did; he said something to Thompson to aggravate him, and Thompson was going to fight with him; called him a rogue; I told him, Mr. Lee, I will let you go in the morning, never mind Mr. Thompson, says I, you have vexed him; I forced him into his bed-room; and when I was forcing him into his room, Mr. Warren, says he, have you deceived me? no, says I; says he, for God's

sake run me through the body; the next morning, about nine o'clock, I went home; says I, Mr. Lee, what sort of a watch was that you gave me last night, that you said I could so easily get repaired? he put his hand in his pocket, and gave me another gold watch, and two guineas more.

Q. Was that broke too? - A. No; he owned that himself; he told me it was worth 40 guineas; that he would send me 40 guineas on Saturday, and some plate; I told him I was very sorry for him; that it was my duty to fetch him and the property before the Magistrate.

Q. Did you do so? - A. I told him it was my duty not to betray the gentleman that appointed me; and Alderman Twiddey committed him to Newgate, in Dublin

Q. What did you do with the watches and seals? - A. I left them with Alderman Twiddey.

Q. Did you put any mark upon them? - A. Yes; they were all marked by Mr. Moore, in my presence, and Alderman Twiddey's presence.

Q. Should you know them again if you were to see them? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Was the prisoner carried before Alderman Twiddey at that time? - A. He was. (The gold watch produced). Upon my oath this is the watch that I had from the prisoner; my name is wrote upon it, (the broken watch produced).

Q. How do you know that is the watch you delivered to Alderman Twiddey? - A. I marked it.

Mr. Knowlys. That watch, my Lord, is not in the indictment.

Witness. Here is a diamond star pin, which has my mark upon it; a pair of gold ear-rings are marked with my name, in my own hand-writing; a gold chain and seal, with my name upon it, he made me a present of that, and I wore it; a pair of brilliant ear-rings, with my name upon it; four rings, with my name upon a piece of paper attached to them; a gold ring studded with diamonds, there is the private mark of the shop, and my name upon; and I also know it by a dent in it.

Q.Had you all this property, now produced, from the prisoner at the bar? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. This man was committed by Mr. Twiddey to your house? - A. He was.

Q. He was committed there only on suspicion, I believe? - A. Just so.

Q. He had been a week in your house? - A. Yes.

Q. And then, being afraid he should not get bail, he offered this property to get his liberty. Now, you tell us, that it was after your agreement with him, that he sent to his friends for these things, after you had promised he should go, when a sufficient recompence was made to you? - A. Yes.

Q.These things were brought by other persons to him? - A. Yes, by his father and mother.

Q. I understand he gave you a watch one night? - A. Yes.

Q. The next morning, you asked him what kind of a watch it was? - A. Yes.

Q. Did he make any reply to it? - A. No; he did not.

Q. It was entirely in the expectation of getting his liberty that he gave you these things? - A. He thought I would let him go.

Q. Was this watch-chain, and seal, that you wore, brought by his father and mother? - A. It was.

Q.And the watch that he took out of his pocket? - A. No; that he constantly wore.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Do you know the prisoner? - A. Only by having seen him in the streets.

Q. How long have you known him? - A. I had seen him in the neighbourhood of St. James's, about two or three years; he lived, as I understood, in Angel-court; I live in Bury-street.

Q. Did you know a woman of the name of Sarah Chandler ? - A. I have seen her.

Q.Was the prisoner acquainted with her? - A. I don't know.

Q. Upon your oath, don't you know? - A. No further than seeing her and him in company, as I should see any other man or woman; they passed as man and wife; I cannot say that they were married.

Q. Had they any children? - A. This man came to my house, in the character of a labouring man, some time last summer, but the exact time I cannot say; he asked me if I knew any woman that gave suck? I told him I knew a Mrs. Brown, in St. James's-street, without a husband, that I thought would be very glad to get a shilling; and he begged of me to go to Angel-court, to Mrs. White's, where the child was, and I went with him.

Q. Whose child was it? - A. I cannot tell the father of it; by his taking care of it, I supposed it was his.

Q. But did you understand, from your conversation with him, that it was his child? - A. Yes; he and I brought it down from this Mrs. White's, she had the care of the child at that time; I gave the child to this Mrs. Brown, I carried it to her; and that is all that I can tell about it.

Q. Who did he say was the mother? - A. This woman that went by the name of his wife.

Q. Did you see the woman after she was at Mr. Dingwall's? - A. I never saw her in Mr. Ding

wall's house; I heard her name was Sarah Chandler; I don't know.

Court. Q. Did the woman go by the name of Sarah Chandler? - A. I never heard her name till I heard it since this passed.

Q.Where did you see her afterwards? - A. At Mr. Dingwall's door once, but I did not know who lived there.

Q. When did you see her at Mr. Dingwall's? - A. I cannot say when it was; I was going to the palace.

Q. Tell us what time of the year was it? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Winter or summer? - A. The latter end of the fine weather; she was washing Mr. Dingwall's door upon her knees, wiping and washing the door; but I never had any acquaintance with the woman in my life.

Q.As if she was a servant of the house? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. You did not know that she was called Sarah Chandler till lately? - A. No.

Q. Did you know the prisoner's name? - A. I always heard him called Lee.

Q. Did you ever hear him speak of her as his wife? - A. I never heard that he was married to her; but she used to go in the street by the name.

Q. But he told you that was his child, and this woman the mother of it? - A. I suppose, by their having the child between them, that it must be so; he never told me any particular thing about it.

Q. Did they appear to be persons living together as man and wife? - A. I believe all the neighbours thought so as well as me; I cannot say whether they were or not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You supposed this man had a child by this woman? - A. I don't know, because I know neither of them.


I know the prisoner; I have know him three years.

Q. Do you know a person of the name of Sarah Chandler ? - A. Yes.

Q. How long have you known her? - A. Not above six months.

Q. Do you know where she lived servant? - A. Yes; with Mr. Dingwall.

Q. Did you know her before that? - A. Yes; she lived with the prisoner.

Q. In what way did they live together? - A. As man and wife. The day before the robbery was committed, Sarah Chandler came to the house of William Lee , and left a message, and she then went back to her place again.

Q. Did you tell the prisoner what Mrs. Chandler had said? - A. No; his brother did.

Q. Did his brother tell it in your hearing? - A. No; the same evening, he and Gregory Lee went out together.

Q. What evening? - A. The evening the robbery was committed; William Lee returned, about nine o'clock, with the jewels in his pocket.

Q. Did you see them? - A. Yes; and his brother, and Sarah Chandler , came into the room directly after; the brother brought a large bundle of linen cloaths, they were packed in a large trunk.

Q. What was put in the trunk? - A. The cloaths directed and sent to Dublin; but by what waggon I don't know.

Q. What became of the jewels? - A. Lee had them in his possession; then William Lee, and Sarah Chandler , went away together, she was dressed in man's cloaths, and went for Dublin; Gregory Lee, this man's brother, and his wife, went the same evening for Bristol, with the coach; and I had the care of William Lee 's child.

Q.Were you his servant? - A. No, I was not; I was going to Dublin with them; I had the care of the child.

Q. Did you, after William Lee and Sarah Chandler set off for Dublin, see them again? - A. No, I did not.

Q.(To Mr. Bailieu). Are those two brilliant diamonds, (shewing them to the witness), your property? - A. Yes; both of them.

Q.What is the value of them? - A. 295l. (Looks at the pearl bracelets.) These are mine; they were lost upon this occasion; these that have a paper on them, were delivered by the prisoner to the jailer.

Q. This watch, which was taken to pieces, is not in the indictment, but was taken at the same time? - A. Yes; it is my own making; it is a particular kind of a watch; no other watchmaker could make it.

Q. Where was this watch at the time you left the house? - A. Put in the escrutore drawer.

Q.How did you find the drawers? - A. There was a key in the drawers that belonged to the other room.

Q. Were the diamond rings in the house? - A. Yes.

Q. Look at that watch? - A. It was in the iron closet. On the gold ring, studded with diamonds, there is my own mark; it is a parchment label, with a mark to denote the price.

Court. Q. Is that worth 8l.? - A. Yes.

Q.(To Mr. Dingwall.) When you returned home, was there any violence on the house? - A. A show-glass was broke; the door was fast.

Q. There did not appear to have been any violence? - A. No.

Prisoner's defence. Between nine and ten o'clock,

I was up at Warwick-court, Holborn, a message was sent for me to come down; there was John Garrett and Joseph Delaware and his sister, had a red morocco case with these diamonds in it; John Garret told me he had found the things, and asked me if I would make a purchase of them; I said I was not a judge, but if they would trust me with them, I would enquire in two hours, and purchase them; they left them with me; I asked a man the value of them; I told him all the rest afterwards; the man lives in Petticoat-lane; I sent for him, he would not come; those things that are valued at 230l. he and his son valued at 30l. I offered them for sale very openly, which I would not have done, if I had known they had been stolen. Mr. Moore knows I did; he said he wished to have some more conversation with me before he bought them; a person came in and said he had known me 12 years, and knew nothing but honour and honesty of me; there are men in Court know I was four months at Lord Malden's; I appeal to your Lordship to make an enquiry into my character. Before I would be out of employ, I would go into the lowest capacity in life. I was stopped, on the 17th of December, by Mr. Moore, he took pains to enquire my character; I recommended him to Mr. Swaine; he came in to Mr. Moore's parlour, and declared he knew me; Mr. Moore went to Mr. Lee, and, when he came back, he said I had been only a waiter, and could not come honestly by the things. I was sent to Mr. Warren's, on the 17th of December, in the afternoon, and was there till that day eight days; when I had been there five days, I sent to employ Counsellor Manley; he said it was a bailable offence; he came again in the morning, and produced three newspapers, which he said were just arrived from England, and that the things had been stolen, and it was a dangerous thing; Mr. Warren said, if I would give him the things he would liberate me; I sent for a pocket handkerchief with the things, and gave them to him. This woman is perjured; she says my brother came in; he is a chairman to a lady, No. 66, Dorset-street, Dublin. I don't know a woman of the name of Chandler.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 27.)

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-39

Related Material

193. WILLIAM MILLAN was indicted, for that he, on the 14th of February , in the King's highway, upon Joseph Harrison , did make an assault, putting him in corporeal fear and danger of his life, and stealing from his person a half guinea, a half crown, and sixpence in monies, numbered, his property .


I am a collar-maker , I work for Mr. Mayo, On last Sunday, the 14th of this month, about eight o'clock at night, I was going to my lodgings, the bottom of the Old Change; I turned out of Cheapside, down Bread-street ; as I was going down Bread-street, there were three men standing; I walked down twenty about or thirty yards, and the second man came up to me; I was going to say what do you want with me, but before I could speak, I received a violent blow on the temple, which brought me to the ground; I then perceived three men round me, they rifled my pockets, turned my right-hand pocket inside out, and took from me half a guinea, a half crown, and a sixpence, and immediately made off; I took my hat in my hand, and pursued them, and called watch, watch; I never lost sight of them till I came to the corner of Watling-street; there they made a stop; I was come near them; then they took contrary ways; two took to the right, the prisoner took to the left, and I followed him; in the course of one hundred or one hundred and fifty yards, I came very near him; I still called watch, the prisoner turned short round on his heel, and said here is the watch, if you want the watch; I took him by the collar, and said I want you as much as the watch; I said you have robbed me, and held him by the collar till a gentleman came to my assistance; in about half a minute after, the patrole or watchman came up and we delivered him to him, and he took him to the watch-house.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. This was about eight at night? - A. Within five minutes up or down.

Q. It was a dark night, very misty? - A. It was misty.

This violent blow must have stunned you a little? - A. It did, undoubtedly.

Q. Where were you coming from at that time? - A. Finsbury-square.

Q. Had you been in company? - A. Yes, with one person at a gentleman's house.

Q. You had been drinking? - A. I cannot say, it might be a pint; it don't signify cross-questioning me, I have said the truth, and can say no more.

Mr. Ally. It is my duty to cross-question you a little.

Q. You cannot recollect what you drank? - A. No; I cannot.

Q. Had you any view of the person previous to the time you were knocked down? - A. I passed them; I did not know who they were, they jostled me, and then knocked me down.

Q. Will you undertake to swear, when the prisoner turned down, and you were one hundred and

fifty yards from him, and being stunned with the fall, that you can swear to the face of the man? - A. I never said I was one hundred and fifty yards from him.

Q.Then you had run one hundred and fifty yards before you came near him? - A. I was about eight yards from them, and ran one hundred and fifty yards, then I came near them.

Q. When you went to the watch-house, was the prisoner searched? - A. I believe he was searched; I saw him searched.

Q. Was there any thing found upon him? - A. I believe nothing but a knife.

Q. He had never been out of your sight? - A. No.

Were you examined before the Lord Mayor? - A. Before Alderman Newnham, I believe.

Q. Did you give the same account there as you have here? - A. The very same.

Q. Did not you fix upon another man? - A. No; I said, I believed a person who was there, was one of the party, but I was not certain; I believe so now.

Q. Why did not the Alderman commit him? - A. He did, for another hearing.

Q. When had you seen your money before this time. - A. About half an hour before I was knocked down; a few minutes before I left the house.

Q. You fixed upon another person before the Alderman, and he had so much doubt, that he dismissed him; did you never hear any thing of a reward? - A. Never; I never was in a Court before.

Court. About eight o'clock you were going by these men, and they followed you, and before you could say a word, you were knocked down? - A. Yes.

Court. Did you see the person that struck you? - A. I did not.

Court. You said your pockets were rifled of a half guinea, a half crown, and a sixpence; had you recovered so far as to take any observations of the persons? - A. As I lay on my left side, there was a lamp on the right side, and I had a perfect view of the prisoner's face.

Court. Q. How soon did you get up? - A. I got up immediately; I picked up my hat in my left hand, and ran with it in my hand.

Court. Q. You never lost sight of the men till they stopped? - A. I never lost sight of any of them, till they ran different ways; I never lost sight of the prisoner till I put my hand upon him.

Jury. Q. What business are you? - A. A collar-maker; I work with Thomas Mayo, No. 231, Upper Thames-street.

Court. Q. How long have you worked with him? - A. Ever since I have been in town; three years last October.


I am clerk to Mr. Winkworth, a flour factor, in Queen Hithe: I was going down Bread-street, from Cheapside, last Sunday evening, about eight o'clock; just by the corner of Watling-street several people were running towards us, and one crying watch; I heard several people at a little distance before me, they turned round the corner, and ran down Watling-street.

Q. How many? - A. Two.

Q. How many did you see at first? - A. There seemed to be three or four; I ran down after them; the man that cried watch ran down the middle of the street, still crying watch; the person he seemed to have in his eye, the prisoner, ran down the left side, on the pavement; he came to the corner of Bow-lane, he made to cross the way, and the man that cried watch laid hold of him by the collar; I I was up close to him; that is the man he caught by the collar; he charged him with knocking him down and picking his pocket of half-a-crown, half-a-guinea, and sixpence.

Q. Is Harrison the man that was pursuing the other? - A. Yes; the prisoner was the man that he had in his eye.

Q. How many were there together when you first saw them? - A. I cannot say; there were more than two when they met us; I don't know which way they took.

Mr. Ally. Q. You were not there at the commencement of the pursuit, not till watch was cried? - A. No.


I am a clerk to the East-India Company: On Sunday evening last, going down Bread-street, from Cheapside, I heard the cry of watch repeatedly; I saw the prisoner, with two others, running, and as they advanced within a few yards of me, they halted, and became from a run to a walk, a sharp walk, scarcely to be called a walk; I heard the prisoner say to the other two, "don't run, or they will be after us," which caused me to suspect the prisoner and the others had been doing what they ought not to have done; but, on the man not calling stop thieves, I did not intercept them, or stop them; and they passed me and turned round the corner to Watling-street; the prosecutor. Joshua Harrison, by the time they got to the corner, was within three or four yards at the farthest; when the prisoner turned the corner, I took no further notice; but by missing my friend, James Wheeler, who was running, with the prosecutor, after the prisoner, I ran about thirty or forty yards; I came up with them just at the time they had taken the prisoner; and, by Joshua Harrison repeatedly crying "watch, watch," a watchman followed; the

prisoner stopped, and said, here is the watchman if you want the watch; Harrison said, I likewise want you, as well as the watch, "for," says he,"you have robbed me;" and he denied it; and said, he was not the person; he knew nothing of it; they gave charge for charge, and they went to the watch-house; when I came up to the prosecutor, and saw him in a dirty condition, I knew him, and went with them to the watch-house; I have done business for his master two years, and knew him perfectly well; I went to the watch-house, and can repeat what passed.

Q. Was the prisoner by at the time? - A. Yes; he was in charge, in the watch-house at the time.

Court. Q. What was it? - A. The constable questioned the prisoner, respecting the charge against him; what he was by prosession; and where he lived; he said, he was a horse-dealer, and that he was just come from Snow-hill; and that he lived in Barbican; the constable asked, what business he had in Bread-street, to go from Snow-hill to Barbican; he said, he had business there; he was searched; he had no money; he said, he had none; his having no money about him, caused a suspicion; and he asked him, if he had any friends to bail him from going to prison; he said, he had friends, but would not trouble them that night.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ally. Q. You said, you had a suspicion, because he had no money in his pocket? - A. The people had a suspicion of a man of his appearance having no money.

Q. When you saw these men they were turning into Watling-street? - A. The prisoner did; I cannot say which way the others turned.

Q. After they turned the corner, the prosecutor was four or five yards from the corner? - A. He did not turn the corner immediately, but crossed the way; had he turned short round the corner, the prosecutor would have lost sight of him.

Prisoner's defence. I had been to my sister's, in Red Lion-street; I was going into the Borough to Mr. Hurst, about a horse; in Watling-street I heard a man cry out

"watch, watch;" he was very much in liquor; I turned round, and said, here is the watch, and he laid hold of me, and said, I had robbed him.

Q.(To Goodwin). Was the prosecutor in liquor? - A. He was a little in liquor, rather merry; he could run as well as if he was not in liquor; he gave a clear account at the watch-house; he said, they thought me drunk, but I was not so drunk as they thought for.

Court. (To Harrison). Q. Did you swear to any other man before the Magistrate? - A. No; being examined before the Magistrate, there was a person there, they had some discourse together; the Magistrate said, do you know that man; I said, I did not know him, I believed he was one that was in the company; the Alderman bid them shut the door, that none might escape; and he slipped out of the hall; the Alderman asked me, if I could swear to him; I said, I could not; I believed he was one of the men.

For the Prisoner.


I am a hair-dresser, No. 134, Saffron-hill; I have known the prisoner four or five years; he always behaved quiet and civil in my house.

Q. What is the prisoner? - A. I always thought he was a horse-dealer; he frequently came by my house, on a Friday, with horses.


I am a taylor; I have known him a year and a half.

Q. Is he a horse-dealer? - A. As far as I know; he was always just and honest to me.


I live at Covent Garden; I am a fruiterer; I live with Mr. Bailey, a relation of mine; he keeps a shop there, and has several houses in the county of Middlesex, both leasehold and freehold.

Q. Do you recollect being before Alderman Newnham? - A. Perfectly well; on Monday last, I had some little business in the city, for my master, a person asked me to go, through curiosity, to Guildhall, this man was standing at the door; I had a thought of a warrant being granted against me, for an assault, and thought it best to make my escape, and I went out; this gentleman gave the alarm of stop-thief; I did not stop, but when the alarm of stop-thief was given, I immediately stopped and surrendered myself to this man; the prosecutor, before I came in, said, that is the man, and I will swear to him; the gentleman desired me to step over the bar, and when I came within a yard or two of him, and unbuttoned my coat, he said, he could not swear to me; I said, if you could swear to me at fourteen yards distance, why cannot you swear to me now; the Alderman said, he must commit me till the next morning; I brought several persons to my character the next day, and the Alderman discharged me; I believe he would swear to any man.

Court. Q. You are servant to Mr. Bailey, a relation of your's? - A. Yes; a fruiturer in Covent-garden; Mr. John Bailey, for there are two in the market of that name.

Q. You happened, by accident, to go to Guildhall? - A. Yes.

Q. A thought occurred to you, there might be a

warrant against you, for an assault? - A. Yes; I was convinced there was.

Q. On what person? - A. A John Smith , a hackney-coachman, in Holborn, the lower part, towards St. Andrew's-church.

Q.Towards the watering-house? - A. It was, as far as I know, I cannot pretend to say under what denomination the house goes.

Q. A house near to Hatton-garden? - A. Yes.

Q. A house that coachmen use? - A. Yes.

Q. What day was it? - A. It might be a week, or a fortnight back, I cannot say.

Q. You don't every week or fortnight assault men, you know? - A. No; it might be so far as eight or nine days back.

Q. From this time, or the time you went before the Magistrate? - A. From this time.

Q. When did you go before the Magistrate? - A. Last Monday and Tuesday.

Q. And you cannot recollect the day of this assault? - A. I don't recollect.

Q. You don't recollect the house? - A. No; I only went in to drink.

Q.Frequently, perhaps? - A. No; I never call frequently at any house to drink.

Q. How many days were it before you were before Alderman Newnham? - A. About five or six days.

Q. Where does John Smith live? - A. I cannot say; the man was an entire stranger to me; I was in the tap-room, drinking a pint of porter, he interfered with my company.

Q. You don't know where John Smith lives? - A. No.

Q. Do you know what coach he drives? - A. That I don't know, he had a great-coat on, and a whip in his hand.

Q. How do you know that his name was Smith? - A. I enquired his name.

Q. Who told you his name was Smith? - A. I don't know.

Q. Upon your oath, who told you so? - A. Upon my oath, I don't know who told me so.

Q.(To Harrison). Look at that man; what do you believe of him? - A. I believe, as I said before the Alderman, he was the man that was with the prisoner; I cannot swear to him.

Q.(To Goodwin). Did you observe the other two men? - A. No, I cannot say that I did; I can refute what he said in Guildhall respecting the prosecutor offering to swear to him.

Mr. Ally. (To Davis). Q. Do you live in Covent-garden still? - A. No; I am bound to India.


I was in the office, and when the examination of the prisoner took place, this man was standing near the bar; an order was given for the door to be shut; this man ran out of the place; I ran after him, and brought him back; coming along the yard, I heard the prosecutor say, that is one that robbed me; we took him to the Magistrate, and he committed him.

Q. Upon your oath, did Harrison say, that is the man, and I will swear to him? - A. Not in those words; as we were bringing the prisoner back, the prosecutor pointed him out and said, I think I can swear that is one of the men that robbed me.

Q. Davis said, that Harrison said, that is the man, and I will swear to him? - A. He pointed to him, and said, that is one of the men.

Q.(To Harrison.) Did you make use of those words, that is the man, and I will swear to him? - A. I never said such a word; I said, I believe that is one of the men.

Q.(To Goodwin.) Did Harrison say, that is the man, and I will swear to him? - A. No, he did not; he said, I cannot swear to him.

Q. Was the prosecutor out of the room at all? - A. I will not swear to that, it might be just as he was bringing back, he might be out a minute.

Q. Did Harrison go out of the room? - A. I did not know him then; the man was in the yard that said, that is the man, that is the man, that robbed me.

Q.(To Harrison). Did you follow the person into Guildhall-yard? - A. I did not till after the prisoner was out.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 20.)

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

( Thomas Davis was committed to take his trial for perjury).

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-40

Related Material

194. GEORGE, otherwise WILLIAM DAVIES , was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 21st of Jan . a cotton handkerchief, value 6d. two cloth coats, value 30s. a pair of worsted breeches, value 3s. and a cotton waistcoat, faced with satin, value 6s. the property of John Lockyer .


I live at No. 59, Castle-street, Oxford-market; On the 21st of January, about half past six o'clock in the evening, I ordered my son to get two coats, a waistcoat, and a pair of breeches, tied up in a handkerchief; I went out that evening, and when I returned, my wife informed me my son was robbed; the property was found upon the prisoner.

Cross-examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. You are a taylor ? - A. Yes.

Q. You have a partner, I believe? - A. No.

Q. Have you seen the prisoner since his commitment? - A. Yes.

Q.What passed between you and the prisoner? - A. He begged for mercy.

Q. You have seen him since his commitment to Newgate, have not you? - A. Yes, I say so.

Q. You told the prisoner you would forgive him? - A. I told him I would shew him as much mercy as the Court would allow, on account of his father, who is an aged man.


I was crossing the top of Cheapside, on the 21st of January, about half past seven in the evening; as I was crossing towards Newgate-street, a coach was coming down, I stopped while the coach passed; a little boy was behind the coach, crying out, which drew my eye between the coach and the wheel; he was behind the coach riding; I saw the prisoner at the bar pulling his parcel, and saw the boy crying, and he pulled the poor boy down upon his hands and knees, and then ran away with the bundle under his arm; I cried out stop thief, and ran after him as fast as I could; before he crossed Cheapside , he dropped the bundle; I ran after him, and about four yards further he fell down, then I took him by the collar, and took him to the Compter; as soon as I got hold of him, the little boy came up and picked up the parcel.

Cross-examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. What was the first thing that made you observe what you have been stating? - A. The boy crying.

Q. They were both behind the coach together? - A. Yes; but the prisoner was down, and he was up.


I shall be ten years old next June. I was going to Sir Benjamin Hammett's with a bundle of cloths for three of the clerks; This the bundle (producing it). In the middle of Newgate-street, the prisoner got up behind the coach with me, and he asked me where I was going; I told him I was going along Cheapside, that was all the conversation that passed between him and me.

Q. What did he do then? - A. He did not do any thing to me; but, at the bottom of Newgate-street, he snatched the bundle from me behind the coach, and he fell down, and the gentleman took him.

Q.(To Lockyer). Is that your property? - A. They belonged to Sir Benjamin Hammett 's clerks, I made them.

Cross-examined by Mr. Peatt. Q. You make cloaths for Sir Benjamin Hammett? - A. No, I don't but for three of the clerks that are there.

Q. Did you take any particular notice; were these cloaths in your hand after they were made? - A. There is a particular mark upon one coat.

Q. Did you cut them out yourself? - A. Yes, I did.

Prisoner's defence. I am innocent of the crime laid to my charge; I know nothing at all about it; when I was taken, I was upwards of thirty yards from the coach, and, I declare to God, I am as innocent of it as the child unborn, in regard of taking it away; I was lame at that time, was the reason of my riding behind the coach.

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

Transported for seven years .

GUILTY . (Aged 25.)

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-41
VerdictGuilty > theft under 1s
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

195. WILLIAM WALLIS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , eleven Seville oranges, value 6d. eleven China oranges, value 6d. and twenty-seven lemons, value 1s. the property of John Smallpiece .


On Friday, the 29th of January, I lost eleven Seville oranges, eleven China oranges, and twenty-seven lemons, out of my cellar; they are worth 2s. On Thursday the 28th, about eleven o'clock in the evening, I went down in the cellar; I had missed a bag of oranges; I searched the cellar, in expectation of finding them; and found a smock frock laid in a corner; I took it up, and found there was a bag with fruit in it; the bag was tied, and the smock frock tied over it; I untied them both, and told the fruit out of the bag; there were forty-nine in the whole; I tied them up again and put them where I found them; the prisoner was a weekly man of mine; my servants were all in bed; the next morning I went into the cellar again, between seven and eight o'clock; I will not be certain of the hour; I found the prisoner there with a lighted candle, coming out of the nut bin, where we shoot our nuts; it was an empty bin; there were no nuts in it; I asked him, if he wanted any thing; he went up stairs, and I went further into the cellar; I then looked in the nut bin, and found the bag and the smock frock, where I found them before; I then came up into the shop, and served some customers; in the mean time, the man went down into the cellar again; he came up again, and went into a little back yard that I had; I took no further notice; he went to breakfast at the usual hour; when he was gone I told my apprentice, and a lad that is here, to look out, and see if he carried them away; and if they saw him, to stop him, and give the alarm to me, or the first person they could; while he was at breakfast, I went into the cellar again, and found the bundle was gone; being cer

tain he could not have taken in out of the house, I searched for it, and found it hid behind some hoops in the same nut bin; the smock frock was off from it then; then I looked in many places, at last I found the smock frock in the yard, put under a basket, with nothing in it; in the evening, a little aser six o'clock, I was up at tea, and the lad called me as loud as he could; and I came down stairs and ran after the prisoner; he turned round the corner of Botolph-lane, and went into a public-house called the Coopers' Arms; as he got near the cellar door, I got hold of him, with the bag in his hand; I said, William, you have robbed me; I have suspected you, and now I have caught you; and I sent for a constable, and took him to the Compter; there is no mark upon the bag; but I know it is the same that was in my cellar the night before; I have no doubt of it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Vaughan. Q. As to the fruit, of course, a man of your credit will not pretend to swear to oranges and lemons? - A. No.

Q. There is no mark upon the bag? - A. No.

Q. That is not in the indictment? - A. No.

Q. You never missed any fruit you suspected to be taken by the prisoner? - A. You had better not ask me that question.

Q. Did you see him on the Thursday or Friday, to which you are now speaking, take any oranges away? - A. No.

Q.How long has this man been with you? - A. I believe about five months.

Q. Do you know who he lived with before? - A. A grocer, in Bishopsgate-street, the corner of the Four Swans Inn; I don't know his name.

Q. Did you ever happen to lose your gold watch at any time? - A. The prisoner, I believe, did bring it up to me.

Q. Where was it? - A. I left it in the privy; he gave it to my apprentice, which was certainly a very good act.

Q. This watch was of something more value than the oranges? - A. Yes; I should have been very much vexed if I had lost it; it was not a gold watch; but it was certainly of considerable value.


One night the prisoner was nailing down a chest of fruit; he went down for a hoop, and came up again; he put out the candle, and then he went to the stair-head and lapped the fruit up in his apron.

Q. Was the bag there too? - A. Yes; I saw one end of it hang out of his apron, and then he went out; and I called the other man twice, his name is Charles; and then I called my master; he went after the prisoner, and caught him directly by the Cooper's Arms, in Botolph-lane; I saw my master take him, and I saw the fruit in his hand.

Cross-examined by Mr. Vaughan. Q. The Cooper's Arms is a very little way from your house? - A. Yes.

Q. Did not the prisoner usually go to that house? - A. Yes.

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

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 11d . (Aged 28.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice ASHHURST.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-42
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment

Related Material

196. JOHN CROSS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 11th of February , two pair of upper leathers of men's shoes, value 3s. the property of Samuel Jackson .

(The case was opened by Mr. Gurney).


Examined by Mr. Gurney. Q. I am foreman to Mr. Jackson, a currier ; the prisoner was porter to Mr. Jackson; On the 11th of February, I missed two pair of upper leathers, which I had cut the evening before, and laid in the window behind the counter, to execute an order of thirty-seven; in the morning there were but thirty-five, when he went out to breakfast. -

Q. Where were these upper leathers lying? - A. Upon a cross bench behind the counter, one upon the other; he came to work about seven in the morning.

Q. His business is to open the shop? - A. Sometimes; but it is the business of the younger porter to open and shut shop.

Q. Did the course of his business that morning lead him to the place where these upper leathers laid? - A. He must go there to unscrew the screws.

Q. Was the prisoner in the shop that morning? - A. I came a little after seven, and found him there; he went out to breakfast between eight and nine; I had missed them before he went out.

Q. In consequence of any directions from your master, did you sollow the prisoner? - A. I did; he was got about two doors, I called John, he returned, and I advanced; I said, you must come back; he said,

"why, what is the matter?" I said, John, there is an unfortunate circumstance happened, I have missed two pair of upper leathers, and you must go back; he hesitated, and rather refused to come back; but when I seemed determined, he came back with me; Mr. Jackson was waiting in the shop; we went up into the ware-room, and Mr. Jackson said, you must, or you shall be searched; I laid hold of his coat pocket, and the

prisoner, in a very affecting way, said, I have got them; he took one pair out of one pocket, and another pair out of the other, and gave them into my hands; I have had them ever since, (produces them).

Q.Are there any marks upon them? - A. There is my name upon them.

Q.Where they marked before you took them from him? - A. There is the mark of the currier's man upon it.

Q.Was there any further conversation between your master and the prisoner? - A. No more than the unfortunate man went down upon his knees, and begged for mercy, and he would do any thing if he would spare him; he said,

"no John, I will hear nothing, say nothing, I have caught you."

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Did any such thing as this pass - the man said, he was in want of shoes, he had taken them and meant to account for them? - A. Not a word.

Q.Was any promise made him, if he would tell any thing about it? - A. None at all; Mr. Jackson was very guarded.


I am the foreman that sells the leather; I happened to be there when the prisoner was brought back; they shut the door, and Mr. Jackson desired me to bear witness; that he had some suspicion of his robbing him, and he had some property about him; I left my work, and Mr. Jackson desired Cooper to search him; he first denied that he had any property about him, and then, he said, I have some of your property, Sir, and he put his hand to his right hand pocket, and pulled out one pair of upper leathers, and then to his left hand pocket, and pulled out another pair; I went for a constable.

Prisoner's defence. My Lord, I did not disown having the property about me; but I did not mean to wrong him of them; I never did wrong any body in my life, to my knowledge; he has entrusted me with a great deal of property; I leave the rest of my defence to my counsel.

For the Prisoner.

JOHN COOPER called up again.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. This man has been in better circumstances, I believe; he was a horse dealer, in a considerable line? - A. Yes; since I have known him he behaved as a willing servant, and always did what he had to do cheerfully, and has sometimes done a job at over hours; he has a wife, a very honest woman.

GUILTY . (Aged 37.)(He was recommended to mercy by the Jury.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned one month .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-43
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

197. MARGARET MACKENZIE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th of February , two wooden tubs, value 4s. a linen sheet, value 3s. a cotton counterpane value 2s. and a cotton night gown value 6d. the property of James Hearne .


On the 10th of February I lost two tubs, a pail, a cotton counterpane, a sheet, and a bed gown, out of the yard. I don't know any thing of the prisoner.


I am servant to Mr. Hill, a pawnbroker; a counterpane was offered to be pledged at my master's shop, by the prisoner at the bar, on Thursday evening the 11th of February; we stopped it, because we had notice. The officer has got it.

ROBERT HICKS sworn.(Produces a counterpane, a sheet, and a night gown).

About a quarter after nine o'clock, on the 11th of February, Mr. Hill, the pawnbroker, sent for me; when I came into the shop I saw the prosecutor and the prisoner at the bar; there was nothing but the counterpane upon the counter; I asked the prisoner where the rest of the things were; the prisoner said, if I would go with her she would show me where the articles were; I went to her lodgings, and behind the door, upon an old hamper, the sheet was hung to dry, which she gave me, and a night gown.

Q. Before she made this discovery, had you made any kind of promise? - A. No; as I was taking her to the watch-house, I asked her what became of the washing-tubs; she told me, she had sold them to Mr. Prior, a broker; I went to Prior's, with the prisoner, and found one of them; he had sold the other; Mr. Prior acknowledged he had bought them of her; I took her to the watch-house, and locked her up.

Mrs. Hearne. These are my husband's property.

Q. What is the value of them? - A. I said, at the Justice's, half-a-guinea altogether.


On Wednesday was se'nnight, about six o'clock, I bought two washing-tubs, and a pail, of the prisoner; I gave her 4s. for them; I am confident it was the prisoner; I delivered one of them to Robert Hicks ; I had sold one tub and the pail.

Prisoner's defence. I had these things to wash for a woman of the name of Jannette Larkin; they were not quite dry; she asked me to go and pawn this counterpane, because she said it was a shop she did not much use, and I was stopped; it was about nine o'clock in the evening.

Court. Q. Where is that woman?

Prisoner. A. I could not find her; I have not

any friends in the place to get any acquaintance for my character.

Court. Q. How long have you been in London? - A. About ten months.

Court. Q. What way of life have you been in? - A. I have been mostly on board a man of war, along with my husband, during that time.

GUILTY . (Aged 32.)(She was recommended, by the Jury, to mercy, on account of her situation, being far advanced in pregnancy).

Fined 1s. and imprisoned six months in the House of Correction .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-44
VerdictsNot Guilty

Related Material

198. GEORGE BUTLER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 18th of November , a wooden cask, value 2s. and eighteen gallons of beer, value 8s. the property of Joseph Kirkman , John Bittleston , and James Williamson .

Second Count. For feloniously stealing, on the 27th of November , another wooden cask, value 2s. and eighteen other gallons of beer, value 8s . the property of the same persons.(The case was opened by Mr. Gurney).


I am a brewer of ale and small-beer , in St. Giles's , in partnership with John Bittleston, and James Williamson; I have no other partners; the prisoner has been in my service three quarters of a year, as drayclerk ; it was his duty to order the beer to be loaded in the morning, to see to the delivery of that beer, and, at the same time, to collect such sums of money as he had receipts given him for from the counting-house.

Q. Was he authorized to sign any receipts himself? - A. He was forbid to sign any receipts himself; and when he had delivered the beer, and the different sums of money, and returned in the evening, he entered the beer delivered into our journal, and accounted with my son for the receipts; and either returned the money for the receipts, or returned the receipts.

Q.Look at that book, and see whose hand-writing that entry is, on the 27th of November? - A. It is George Butler 's account of the beer he took out that morning; and an account of the beer which he delivered to my customers on that day.

Q. Is that signed by the prisoner? - A. It is.

Q. Is there any entry of the beer delivered to Mr. Corbet on that day? - A. There is not.

Q. Is there any entry delivered to Mr. Gouldstone? - A. There is, of three kilderkins.

Q. Do you know any thing, in point of fact, of this day in particular; were you in the counting-house that evening? - A. I have not a recollection that I was; we have a store-house clerk that keeps a check account against it when the dray is loaded; he and the check-clerk count it over; and then in the evening, he is to give an account of what he has done with it; he returned at night, and has charged the beer to the different people, as is here mentioned.

Q. Have you, in your pocket, any receipt, purporting to have been given to Mr. Corbet for beer? - A. I have, (produces it.) It is the hand-writing of George Butler ; it appears from the book, no beer was delivered to Mr. Corbet; and that there were three casks of beer delivered to Mr. Gouldstone.

Court. Q. Does the beer he was supposed to have received that morning, agree with the account he gave in the evening? - A. It does, exactly; he accounts for all the beer he received in the morning.

Q. Did he return any beer that day? - A. If I look in the book I can tell; he returned one kilderkin, and seven sirkins, which he deducts from the quantity which he took out in the morning, which leaves the balance exactly right.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. When did this man leave your service? - A. At Christmas last.

Q. These books are continually under your inspection? - A. They are, when I think proper to look into them.

Q. And always under the inspection of your clerks? - A. It is his business to enter the beer into that book; and then it goes into the hands of the posting-clerk.

Q. Did you charge him with this entry at all before he left your service? - A. I did not.

Q. Is there any difference now depending between you and this man; any charge of wages on his part? - A. He has sent me a bill for wages, of 12l. 3s. 101/2d. I have a set off for that of 34l. odd.

Q. This demand he made before you brought this charge against him? - A. He wrote his bill out and sent it by his wife; I have never spoke to him at all upon the subject.

Q. I ask you, upon the oath you have taken, whether he did not make this demand against you, before you made the accusation against him? - A. He certainly did.

Q. How long before you took him up? - A. Perhaps a week.

Q. Did he send more than once? - A. I never saw any body from him but once; his wife called once, and said she wished I would pay her husband's wages; and I have seen neither him nor her since.

Q. Have you not been told, by your servants, that this man has been sending for his wages? - A. No.

Q. Have not you reason to know that he has sent more than once? - A. If he has, Mr. Bittlestone will give you an answer.

Q. Upon the oath you have taken, as a man of credit, don't you how that he has sent more than once? - A. Upon my oath, I do not.

Q. Have you reason to believe, from your servants, that he has sent more than once? - A. I will not charge my recollection.

Q.Try your recollection again? - A. I cannot say stronger than I have said.

Q.Upon your oath, has it not been told you by your servants, that he has sent repeatedly for his wages? - A. If he has, I have no knowledge of it.

Q. It was not more than a week before you took him up, that he sent in this account? - A. I have seen the prisoner several times since he left my service, in his last place, and he never mentioned a word to me about his wages.

Q. In whose employ was he when you took him up? - A. In Messrs. Sharpe's employ.

Q. The way, in which the account is made out, is, that he and the store-clerk together, make out the quantity of beer received for him to carry out? - A. They do.

Q. Whether you have not known frequent mistakes to happen about the quantities sent out, or the quantities received back? - A. Certainly; it is a very possible case to make a mistake.

Q. Does it not frequently happen? - A. If it does happen, we don't hear of it.

Q. I ask again, does it not frequently happen in your brewhouse? - A. It has happened several times with Butler.

Q. This account, checked by your own clerk, tallies, does it not? - A. Yes.

Q.Then your own clerk; whom you trust, has vouched, that the quantity brought back, and the quantity delivered, make up the quantity sent out? - A. Yes.

Q. If there is any mistake in the account, you will make him answerable for it? - A. If they mistake, we certainly do.

Q. Is it not the constant practice, if a man's account is not correct, to make him pay the difference? - A. The only incorrection possible is, the man is to enter a less quantity than that he carries.

Q. My question is this, whether if you find any mistakes in the delivery, and less is delivered than set down, is it not the constant practice to charge it against the man, and either make him pay for it in money, or deduct it from the wages due to him? - A. If we conceive it to be really a mistake, and not downright negligence, we don't.

Q. If you consider it as negligence and carelessness, you do make it matter of account between you? - A. Certainly so.

Q.Then you now consider this man as liable to pay you so much money? - A. No; I don't consider him as liable to pay any thing upon the face of his own account, taking it for granted his account is right.

Q. But if you find afterwards the account is not right, do you not constantly charge the man with the difference? - A. I never charged him with the difference of any thing in my life.

Q. I ask you, when you find the party's account not right, is it not the constant course of your house to put so much against him, and if the account is not right, do you not charge it against him? - A. I have already said, I never made him pay the difference of an 8s. in my life.

Q. Is it not the practice to make other persons pay it? - A. I have considered it as a right, but I never exercised that right; I have not a recollection that I ever did; I am sure I have not in Butler.

Q. Have you not, when you have found the account of others wrong, made them pay the difference, where there is an actual difference, whether you impute it to blunder or design, do you not make the party pay the difference? - A. I don't recollect hardly an instance.

Q. Give us the few instances that you recollect? - A. Then I say, I don't recollect an instance.

Q. How came you to say then, you did not recollect hardly an instance? - A. Surely, if you had not stopped me just when you did, I should certainly have said, I had not a recollection of an instance.

Court. It is perfectly clear, and thus far you have got it, that when a man takes out beer and does not account for it, he must be answerable for that beer; but, says he, though the right is in me, I don't recollect an instance where we have exercised that right.

Mr. Knowlys Q. You say you have a set off of 35l.? - A. I have.

Q. Upon your oath, is not this very beer included in that set off? - A. No, it is not.

Q. Every thing but this beer, I suppose? - A. No, certainly not; there are other things besides.

Q. Every thing but the beer, included in your indictment? - A. No; 22l. of it is for receipts that we have against him, which he has received and not accounted for.

Court. The question is, whether the beer you charge this man with selling, and not accounting for, you have made him debtor for? - A. We charge him with it as our clerk, in the morning.

Court. Q. You say there is a balance of an account; do you, in that balance due to you, include the beer which you now accuse him of having stolen as your property? - A. Certainly not; if it

is so, it is a perfect mistake, it is in my partner Bittleston's hand-writing, I will run through it, and see.

Q.Pray do be so good? - A. I see my partner has put the name of Corbet down.

You see how incautious you are, you swore just now, it was not included in the set off.

Court. Q. What is that book? - A. It is a book of mistakes and blunders that have come against this man, and which has been wrote down here as memorandums, as they have occurred at the counting-house.

Court. Q. Whether you have in the balance of the account made, as a charge against him, this beer, as delivered to Mr. Corbet? - A. It is.

Q. Does that set off include this beer which you say never was sold to Corbet, and you make him debtor for that beer? - A. He is made debtor in this book for the beer.

Q.Which book is written by your partner? - A. Yes.

Q. What do you make him debtor for? - A. Twenty-two pounds seven shillings and six-pence, receipts coming against him, and the amount of this book is 11l. 19s.

Mr. Gurney. You have charged him as your debtor with 11l. 19s. including the beer delivered to Corbet.

Court. Mr. Gurney, Mr. Kirkman has now put a compleat end to the cause, because he first of all states the practice of the trade, which is a very proper one; there is an account taken in the morning of all the beer that he receives; in the evening. he is to account to whom he has sold the beer, and he is likewise to return the receipts when he does not bring the money; and it has been asked upon cross-examination, whether in case of accidents or mistakes, he does not account for it; he does not charge him with it, he says, he is liable, but he does not recollect an instance of it; but it appears, that, for this very beer he himself has done that which has made a debt of it, for, says he, we have charged this account with the identical beer he has sold to Corbet, and therefore we have made him our debtor, and therefore the law says, you shall not afterwards charge him with felony, you having made him your debtor.


Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

There was another indictment against the prisoner, but being under the same circumstances he was. ACQUITTED.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-45
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

199. THOMAS DAVIS , otherwise EVANS . was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 13th of February , twenty pounds weight of copper, value 6s. the property of Westgarth Smith , John Dolbin , and John Rigge , the same being fixed to a certain building, he having no title, or claim of title thereto .

Second Count. Charging him with feloniously ripping, cutting, and removing, with intent to steal, the said copper.(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys.)


I am a carpenter: On Saturday night last, between seven and eight, I was coming past the house of Mr. Parke, and heard the rattling of copper.

Q. Was the door of the house open? - A. No, locked; upon hearing of this rattling of copper, which I had often heard going past the house, I called one of my men, and sent him for Mr. Dalton; he and another came, and five or six more; Mr. Dalton went in first at the casement window, which had been broke open.

Q. Broke open by you? - A. No; we found it broke open; when we got into the house, I saw the prisoner trying up copper.

Q. Could you discover where that copper came from? - A. Yes; from the top of the next house to that he was in.

Q. Whose house did that turn out to be? - A. It belongs to the assignees of Mr. Park; built by Mr. Young, and assigned over to Mr. Park; it has been sold since. We took the prisoner away.

Q. Did you see the copper sitted to the top of the house? - A. No; John Dalton saw it fitted.

Court. Q. Were they both empty houses? - A. Yes; it had been robbed a great many times of copper and sashes; I had been watching for some time back, though I was not at that moment.

Prisoner. Q. Did you see me do any thing with the copper? - A. I was not the first that went into the house, but I saw it tied up in an apron; I don't know that it was his apron.

Q. Was there any body else in the house before you went in? - A. I cannot say; we could not find any body else.


I was sent for to this house; I went up and found the prisoner in the garret, and the copper was lying by him, tied up in an apron.

Q. Did you find any body else in the house? - A. No; the prisoner was taken away with the copper; I afterwards saw it fitted to the adjoining house, it fitted exactly; I searched the prisoner, and found an iron chistel upon him, (producing it).

Q. Did it appear to have been fresh cut, or to have been cut a long time? - A. Fresh cut.

Q. Whose house was it? - A. It did belong to one Parke; there is no number on the house.

Prisoner. The apron did not belong to me.


I am clerk to Mr. Walton, the clerk to the commission.

Q. Is Mr. Parke become a bankrupt? - A. Yes.

Q. Who are the assignees? - A. Westgarth Smith, John Dolbin , and John Rigge ; here is the deed of assignment from the Commissioners to the assignees, (producing it); they are the aslignees of Thomas Parke , of London-Wall.


I am an officer of Hatton-Garden; I was sent for to take the prisoner into custody to Mr. Scott's house; I found a vast number of duplicates upon him of a carpenter's tools, and this pair of snuffers, and a glass salt, with some salt in it, this knife (producing it), was found in the room where the prisoner was taken; I saw the copper fitted to the place.

Q. Did the prisoner say any thing when he was taken? - A. No; we knew him very well.

Prisoner's defence. I am innocent of it, the apron never belonged to me, and they never saw the apron in my custody.

Court. What business had you there?

Prisoner. I cannot say that I had any business in the house.

GUILTY . (Aged 52.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERJEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-46
VerdictsNot Guilty > no prosecutor

Related Material

200. HENRY MARSH , otherwise NASH , and ELIZABETH HUNTER , were indicted, the first for stealing in the dwelling-house of Susannah Weale , on the 30th of January , a red morocco pocket-book, value 1l. 1s. two leather bags, value 4d. and two thousand and eight hundred pieces of gold coin, called Louis d'ors, value 2730l. three hundred and fifty pieces of other gold coin, called double Louis d'ors, value 682l. 10s. a black shagreen case, value 10s. 6d. a diamond cross, value 73l. 10s. a pair of diamond ear-rings, hung with drops, value 157l. 10s. eighteen diamond rings, value 175l. a rose diamond ring, value 42l. a hempen bag, value 2d. a piece of foreign gold coin, value 5l. 5s. a diamond ring, value 84l. a diamond cross, value 73l. 10s. twenty-one carrats of diamonds, value 105l. eighteen carrats of rose diamonds, value 73l. 10s. four oval diamonds, value 31l. 10s. four carrats of yellow diamonds, value 8l. 8s. a ruby, value 40s. a gold snuff-box, value 12l. 12s. a cross set with diamonds, value 73l. 10s. a gold pen, with a pencil belonging thereto, value 42s. a diamond ring, value 84l. a pair of silver mounted spectacles and case, value 3l. a wooden box, containing two razors and one strap, value 5s. two miniature pictures, value 5l. 5s. twenty fancy rings, value 105l. the property of Colin de Lolme ; a bank note, value 100l. another bank note, value 40l. the property of the said Colin, the respective sums being due thereon and unsatisfied ; and Elizabeth Hunter , for feloniously receiving a red morocco pocketbook, and a wooden box, part and parcel of the before-mentioned goods, knowing them to have been stolen .

(The prosecutor and witnesses were called, but not appearing, their recognizances were ordered to be estreated).


17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-47
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

201. LEWIS GOULDING was indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of George Gavillier and George Dettmer , about the hour of twelve in the night, of the 12th of February , and burglariously stealing two hundred pounds weight of sugar, value 10l. the property of the said George Gavillier and George Dettmer, in their dwelling-house .


I live in Virginia-street, Ratcliffe Highway, in the parish of St. George's .

Q. Who lives in the house with you? - A. My partner lives upon the premisses; the part that was broke open is a sugar-house; my servants live in a dwelling adjoining to the sugar-house; it is all one building; there is a door out of one into the other, the same as out of this court down into the parlour; the men are obliged to come into the open air, the stair-case being on the outside; there is a door on the lower part to go out of the sugar-house into the dwelling-house; there is a door out of the house into the compting-house; and a door out of the compting-house into the sugar-house; I left it safe on the Friday night, but I can't speak so well to the hour as one of the men can, for he came last out of the sugar-house.


I am servant to Messrs. Gavallier and Dettmer, sugar-bakers ; I left the sugar-house about four in the afternoon, on Friday, the 12th of this month, and, at three o'clock in the morning, I found the window open, and a pane of glass broke with a stone, and there was a mark of feet on some white clay in the window; I missed about sixteen loaves of sugar; they were there ever night; I had marked them, and they were all found afterwards.


On Saturday morning, between eight and nine o'clock, the prisoner came to my shop, and told me, he had some sugar loaves to fell; I live the

corner of Nightingale-lane; he asked me, if I could not sell them for him; I asked him, how he came by the loaves; if he had them from on board the ship; he said, no; I asked him, where they lay; he said, they laid in an empty house of his own; I told him, I could not say any thing, without he would call again; then I went out, after my master was up, to a public-house, and had a pennyworth of two penny, and I was told, this gentleman was robbed; I went to Mr. Mayne, and told him of it; Mr. Mayne told me, I should say nothing till he came in the evening; he came in the evening, and Mayne and this gentleman were sitting in my master's parlour; I asked him, if he would go and get a sample; and then he went with me; he had a stick, and shoved the window up and took them out of an empty house; he stopped up, and reached one out with his hand; then I carried a loaf to my master's shop; he went with me, and this gentleman swore it was his property; afterwards Mr. Mayne said, take him back, and make him believe you will fetch the rest; Mr. Mayne followed me, and another gentleman, and took the man by the empty house where the property lay; my master is a grocer, the corner of Nightingale-lane, his name is Norris; I knew the prisoner before, we were fellow-servants together twelve years ago.


I papered the loaf, that is all I know of it.


I am an officer: On Saturday morning last Stolpey called at my house, about ten o'clock, and informed me, that a sugar house in Virginia-street, was broke open and robbed; he had appointed to meet a man in the evening, who had offered sugar for sale; in consequence of which, I went to his master's house in Nightingale lane, in the evening, and apprehended him at a house the top of Mill-yard, a little above where the new theatre is; I secured the prisoner; I found two bags of sugar; there were three loaves in each bag; and under the windows three loaves more, which made fifteen; and one I sent the man for first, as a sample, made sixteen.

Demier. This is the loaf I marked before the Magistrate.

Mr. Gavillier. Here is a mark of an S; a thing we had not done before; it was marked to know that we had taken a sample of this loaf; the man took it as a sample; here is another mark inside, on the sugar; the other man can swear to that.

Denier. I papered this loaf, and put a mark on the outside; with carrying about, it is almost rubbed out.

Stoipey. I marked this on the inside; it is 26.

Gavillier. It is my property and George Dettmer 's.

Prisoner's defence. On Saturday morning, I got up at six o'clock, and went up Ratcliffe Highway; I met two comrades; they asked me where I was going; they said they had just come down Mill-yard, and the window shutters were open; that there was some sugar there; they shut the shutters close; they said there were about 15; they said they had a good mind to go and fetch it away; I said, better not, somebody may come for them; they asked me if I knew where they could sell them; I said, I knew a man who is a porter, the corner of Nightingale-lane; then they said they would go in the evening; I went to this man, and told him; he asked me how I came by them; I said, I found them; he asked me what sort it was; I said I did not know; there were about 15 or 16; he said, his master was out, and desired me to call again; I went to work, and came again in the evening, and he said his master would not buy them without seeing a sample, and I went and brought a sample; his master was agreeable, and said we must go and fetch them; he said, you must go with me, and help me up with them; I said I would, but I would not carry any.

Q.(To Stolpey.) Was any body with him when he came first? - A. No.

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 39s. but not of breaking and entering the dwelling-house . (Aged 39.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-48
VerdictNot Guilty > fault

Related Material

202. WILLIAM PHAER was indicted for forging and counterfeiting on the 22d of December , a certain order for the payment of money to John Emery , for his service as steward on board the transport ship John and Mary, from January, 1794, to December, 1795, dated London, 14th December, 1795; Mr. William Phaer, please to ask, demand, sue for, demand, recover, and receive, all monies due to me, John Emery , with intent to defraud Thomas Chatteris .

(The case was opened by Mr. Const).

Mr. Justice Lawrence. This is an authority for him to receive, but not an order from the Captain of the ship to pay the money; it is to be sure, a gross fraud, but it is not the crime charged in the indictment.


17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-49
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

203. ALEXANDER PATTEN and SAMUEL JAMES were indicted for breaking and

entering the dwelling-house of Thomas Jones , about the hour of eight in the night of the 25th of January , and burglariously stealing 3 pieces of printed calico, containing 15 yards, value 40s. the property of the said Thomas Jones .


I am shopman to Mr. Jones, a linen-draper , in Oxford-street ; I know nothing of the robbery.


I was informed that these two boys were in custody at the Police Office, in Lambeth-street, Whitechapel; I went and asked the jailor to let me speak to them, and Patten informed me that they had taken these prints from a shop in Oxford-road, about seven o'clock in the evening of the 25th of January; James was then locked up in another apartment; the goods were in the possession of Beare, the officer; I went with him to No. 108, Oxford-road, where there was a pane of glass broke out of the window, down very low, almost at the ground; it was the lower part of the glass that was broke; they could not take the prints from there, and they pulled out the other part of the glass, and got the goods; then we went into Mr. Jones's shop; I went in with the prisoner, and saw two of the shopmen there, and asked if they had lost any thing; they said they did not know that they had; I told them we had two lads in custody; I told them what Patten had informed me; they said they would come the next morning and look at the prints, they did not know whether they had lost any or not; I then took the lad to the house of correction, and left him there.


Between the hours of nine and ten, on the 25th of January, I stopped James, the short lad, with the prints; the tall one ran away; I pursued him, and took him, concealed in a privy; I carried them before a Magistrate; and that is all I know.

Evans. There is our mark upon two of them; they are Mr. Jones's property; the other has no mark.

Q. When had you seen them in Mr. Jones's possession? - A. I cannot exactly say the day.

Patten's defence. When the gentleman came in, he said, if I would tell him how I got them, he would let me go, and that I should have plenty of drink: I have nothing more to say.

James's defence. The gentleman said, if I would tell him where I got them, he would let me go about my business.

Q.(To Griffiths). Did you tell him, if he would tell you where he he got them, you would let him go, or give him drink? - A. No, neither.(The prisoner James called four witnesses, who all gave him a good character).

Both GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 39s .

Patten. (Aged 17.)

James. (Aged 18.)

Transported for seven years .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-50
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

203. MATTHEW ROSS was indicted, for that he, on the King's highway, in and upon Elizabeth Little , widow , did make an assault on the 17th of February , putting her in fear, and taking from her person a fox skin muff, value 18s. the property of the said Elizabeth .


My Lord and Gentlemen. On Wednesday night last, I went out about a little business; I was out later than I should have been; it might be after twelve o'clock; I could not get a coach to go home; I took a walk round James-street, Covent-Garden; I went into a public-house; the prisoner was there; he asked if I was Irish; I told him I was, and he offered his service to see me home; the landlord of the house said, it was fitter for him to go to bed; he followed me out of the house; I did not see him for a good way; he came up to me in Greek-street , there he got his left hand round my waist; I had my muff on my right arm; it was a fox-skin muff that I had borrowed; as I was walking along, there was not a creature near, I heard a foot behind; I turned round, and missed my muff.

Q. Did you hear the foot behind you before the prisoner had his arm round your waist? - A. Exactly at that time; I charged him with taking my muff, and charged him with the watch.

Q. Did you see the muff in his hand? - A. No; I don't know what became of it; there was neither man, woman, nor child there, but the prisoner; I charged the prisoner with the watch, and he charged me, and we both went to the watch-house.

Q. Did you bid the watchman look for the muff? - A. No; I did not believe it was of any service; I had not the recollection of mind, or I would have done it with pleasure, but I was quite frightened; it was very dark.

Q. You did not see him take it? - A. No; I did not.

Q. How long did the prisoner continue with you after you had lost the muff, and before you called the watch? - A. Five minutes, we walked on together.

Q. Did you charge him with taking it before

you got to the watchman? - A. No; I did not, I was so frightened.

Q. Are you a widow? - A. A Captain of a ship's widow.(The prisoner was not put upon his defence.)


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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-51
VerdictsGuilty; Guilty
SentencesTransportation; Transportation

Related Material

204. WILLIAM MOBBS and WILLIAM BATEMAN were indicted, the first for feloniously stealing, on the 20th of December , six hundred pounds weight of saltpetre, value 481. the property of our Sovereign Lord the King.

Second Count. Laying them to be the property of Edmund Hill , Esq .

(The case was opened by Mr. Const).


I am the manager of Mr. Edmund Hill's powder-mills; we have lost large quantities of saltpetre from the 14th of April to the 19th of December; when I made up my accounts, I always found short weight; in November ten hundred weight went of it; and, in December, thirteen hundred weight.

Q. Is it prepared in any particular way? - A. Yes, calcined, as it is in no other place but his Majesty's magazine; nobody in the whole kingdom, but those who make gunpowder for government, have it calcined in that way; it was all marked as this is (producing a cake with the weight marked on it); the prisoner Mobbs was servant to Mr. Hale, a gardener at Twickenham, (two or three years back, or more than that; I don't know any thing of the other prisoner.

Q. That is not one of the pieces that was stolen; have you seen any that was stolen? - A. I have, but it was melted down; I don't know it; there is some of it here.

JAMES MEDWIN (an accomplice,)sworn.

Examined by Mr. Fielding. Q. You come here prepared to speak the whole truth, I hope? - A. Yes; I know both the prisoners. The prisoner Mobbs worked with me in digging gravel on the Hanwarth-Road, the gravel-pit is within a quarter of a mile of the powder-mills, to the best of my knowledge. I was at work with him about fifteen weeks ago, and he asked me if I would assist him with the property belonging to Mr. Hill, which was saltpetre; I agreed to his terms; and he said, he would satisfy me for my trouble; we went from our work that night, or the night after, between five and six o'clock, to Mr. Hill's mill, he got in at a hole where there were some boards taken away, at the back side of the coal-house; he took out, to the best of my knowledge, about a hundred weight; I took it of him, and put it on one side till he thought it convenient to come out again; we put it into a basket, and a bag, and put it on our shoulders; we were there near an hour; we took it to his house, and he put it into a shed adjoining his garden; I applied to Mr. Birch, of Twickenham, for a horse and cart for Mobbs, he let me have it; and the next morning, between five and six o'clock, we took the same saltpetre to London in the cart; it was in cakes, but some were broke; we carried it according to the description of Mobbs, to his brother-in-law, William Bateman, the prisoner .

Q. Where does he live? - A. It is not in my power to tell you; it was carried to a shed in the alley where he lives; Bateman went with Mobbs and the saltpetre; I stopped at Bateman's house till they returned, they returned together. Bateman desired of Mobbs to come up stairs and he would settle with him.

Q. Were those the words? - A. They were, I am sure; they went up stairs, I did not go up with them; we returned home with the cart.

Q. Did you receive any part of the saltpetre, or any thing else, for what you did? - A. I received a guinea from Mobbs when I helped him bring it from the Mills.

Q. You took about a hundred weight? - A. Yes.

Q. How much did you carry to town? - A. About six or seven hundred pounds.

Q. What is Bateman? - A. By Mobbs's account, he is a cutler.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. For a guinea you would break into any house? - A. No; he desined me to assist him, and said he would pay me for it.

Q. You gave the Magistrate an account of all the bad tricks you have been guilty of? - A. I gave him an account of it.

Q. Did you ever live with Mr. Howard, a baker? - A. Yes.

Q. What did he turn you away for? - A. He did not turn me away; it was by the agreement of my friends.

Q.Whether your friends did not agree that Mr. Howard should not prosecute you? - A. I don't know; there were false witnesses brought against me; it is a hard thing for an innocent man.

Q. You have been a thief in this instance? - A. We are all guilty of faults.

Q. You knew very well you were to be prosecuted if you did not give evidence? - A. No, I did not.

Q. Were not you taken up? - A. Yes.

Q.Then was it not in your power to tell whether you would be prosecuted or not? - A. No.

Q. You knew you were guilty? - A. Yes, I knew I was guilty.


I am a grocer and cheesemonger, I know both the prisoners; Bateman did live in Long-alley, Moorfields; he followed the business of a grinder . In the month of December last, I saw a quantity of saltpetre that had been brought out of the country, in a shed belonging to William Gabriel, who keeps a chandler's-shop by Billingsgate.

Q. What had Bateman to do with it? - A. I don't know any thing he had to do with it, but put saltpetre in it. In the middle of December, he applied to me to dispose of a quantity of saltpetre for him; I took a sample of six ounces, it was at one Mr. Moore's, in Wentworth-street; Mr. Gabriel informed me it was there; I took it out of the bag it was in.

Q. Did not Bateman say where it was? - A. I cannot say that he did; I told him I would try to dispose of it for him. I saw Bateman a day or two after, and told him I had offered it for sale, and was to have an answer in a few days; I told him I had got a sample of saltpetre from Mr. Moore's, and carried it to Mr. Macrae's, in Whitechapel; I received no answer from him till I was apprehended; Bateman was in my shop at the time.

Q. Did you know that it was the saltpetre that you were apprehended for? - A. I did not till afterwards; Bateman said, he would bring Gabriel forward, whom, he said, it belonged to, and that he would own it.

Q. Has he done so? - A. No.

Q. Did you ever go out of town with Bateman? - A. No; about the beginning of November I was to have gone with him, in a chaise cart.

Q. Did you know what you were to go for? - A. No.

Q. How much faltpetre did Bateman tell you he had to dispose of? - A. Between four and five hundred weight.

Q. Was it in cakes, like that, (shewing him one)? - A. That at Mr. Moore's was in pieces. When I was taken into custody, and Gabriel was not brought forward, in the evening, I was permitted to go and endeavour to apprehend Bateman; Mr. Moore and I apprehended him just by his own house; I said, you are the man I was looking for; you must go with me; he said, very well; let me go peaceably; when we had got a few yards, he offered to run away; I ran after him, and caught him again; I kept him at my house till the officer came in the morning about eight o'clock.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You were apprehended and bound over to appear here, to answer to this charge? - A. Yes.

Q. You understood from Bateman, that this saltpetre belonged to Gabriel? - A. Yes.

Q. You took the sample from Gabriel's direction? - A. I took it by both their directions.

Q.Then how dared you to state to the Jury, that it was only from Gabriel's direction? - A. I stated what I knew concerning it, as near the truth as I could; I don't know any thing that I have said wrong. Bateman told me, Gabriel would inform me where I should get it.

Q. Bateman said he would bring Gabriel forward? - A. Yes.

Q. You were apprehended? - A. Yes.

Q.Bateman was not apprehended? - A. No.

Q. He was by at the time you were apprehended? - A. Yes; but he went home when I was apprehended.

Q. You know by giving evidence you save yourself from being prosecuted? - A. Yes; I look upon it in that light; I wrote a letter to the Magistrate, and stated every thing that I knew about the business.

Q. Did not you know that by giving that account, you would be admitted an evidence? - A. I had some expectations of it at the time, but was not satisfied I should.

Q. And the letter was wrote to the Magistrate with the hopes of being admitted an evidence? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Do you know where this shed is? - A. In Essex-passage; Bateman lives full half a mile off.

Q. Did you ever see Bateman in that shed? - A. Yes; the first time I saw him, Mobbs and he were leaving saltpetre there; he was there every week almost.

Q. Had you seen Bateman there in the course of December? - A. Yes; Gabriel dealt in gun-stocks, and sometimes he was there about them.

Q.(To Medwin). When the cart came to town did you put the saltpetre in the shed opposite his house? - A. No; Mobbs told me, it was carried about half a mile off from there.

Q. Did he tell you it was half a mile? - A. No; by going the second time I thought it was that; he told me, the second time, that he had lodged the saltpetre in that shed the first time.

Q. Do you know who that shed belongs to? - A. No; I did not see any body there but Bateman and Mobbs.


I live at Twickenham: Medwin came to me to hire my cart for Mobbs; Mobbs used it, and paid me for it; he came for it between five and six in the morning; he is a labouring man.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. This might have been in October? - A. I don't know; it might have been as much as three months, or more, since the first time.

Q. Is it more than two months since the last time? - A. I cannot say; it was about a week before Mobbs was taken up, as far as I remember.


I am a druggist, in Norton Falgate: I don't know either of the prisoners; I never saw them before I saw them at Bow-street.

JOHN FISH sworn.

I am agent to Mr. Hill; the prisoner, Mobbs, lived servant with him.

Q.Have you seen Mobbs since he has been taken up for this offence? - A. Yes; I shewed him this letter, and he acknowledged it to be his hand-writing; and said, he would disclose what he knew of the matter; and the jailor gave him a sheet of paper to write it out; but when he was before the Justice, he said, circumstances had happened since, that he had altered his mind.(The letter read, purporting to be his confession).


I live in Wentworth-street, I am a fallow-chandler and oilman; I know Bateman by sight; in December last, Gabriel came and asked me to lend him a copper for melting saltpetre; Bateman and Gabriel were both there; they were there three or four times while the saltpetre was melting.

Q. Did you apprehend Bateman, or assist? - A. I did, along with a man of the name of Dickins; Dickins was himself apprehended at first, and was let go.

Q. Did you see the saltpetre before it was put in the copper? - A. No, I did not.

Q.There was some saltpetre found at your house? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. You have no dealing in saltpetre yourself? - A. None at all.

Q. How long have you been acquainted with Gabriel? - A. Three or four years; he keeps a chandler's and cheesemonger's shop, in Love-lane; and I serve him with candles.

Q. You told me he was a chandler and cheesemonger; did not you think it strange that there should be some hundred weight of saltpetre, at a chandler's shop? - A. He merely came and asked me to lend him the copper; I did not ask him any questions where he got it.

Q. Do you know Dickins? - A. Yes; he is a cheesemonger in the same street.

Q. Did you ever lend this copper before for melting saltpetre? - A. No.

Q. And yet you asked no questions about it? - A. No; I knew the man.

Q. The officers found the property in your house? - A. Not all; they took a tub full away; I was out when Dickin was taken. Mr. Fish afterwards came into a house were I was, and asked, if Bateman was there, and if Mr. Moore was there; I said, yes; he said, come along with me, and explain what you know of this; I went with him to Bow-street, and told him how it came to my house.

Q. Had Fish communicated a suspicion, that the saltpetre was stolen? - A. I cannot swear whether he did or not.


I am an officer: I found this barrel of saltpetre(producing it,) in Mr. Moore's shed; some of it was in the boiler, and some sprinkled about the shed.

Q. You did not find any in a state like that?(shewing him the cake). - A. No, I went to Gabriel's shed and found a quantity of powder there.(The prisoners both left their defence to their counsel).(For the prisoners).


I am a baker at Twickenham; Metiwin was once my apprentice; he was in my service two years.

Q. From your observation of his character, would you believe him, on his oath? - A. I cannot any way in the world. I have known Mobbs four or five years; I never heard of any misdemeanour of him in my life.(Mobbs called five other witnesses, who gave him a good character.)(Bateman called nine witnesses who gave him a good character.)

Mobbs, GUILTY . (Aged 25.)

Transported for seven years .

Bateman, GUILTY . (Aged 30.)

Transported for fourteen years .

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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-52
VerdictsGuilty > theft under 5s; Not Guilty

Related Material

205. GEORGE WOLFE and MARY STONE were indicted, the first for feloniously stealing, on the 11th of September , a cloth waitstcoat, value 18s. the property of William Taylor , a cloth coat, value 30s. and a bank note, value 20l. the property of Richard Ainsworth ; and the other for receiving, on the 16th of September, part of the above goods, knowing them to have been stolen .


I live with Lord Lauderdale , in Leicester-square ; On Thursday the 10th of September, about nine or ten o'clock, I went to the stables, at the back of the house, in Castle-street; I found the stable-door locked, and the passage door open, that has a communication to the stable; I went into the stable; I then went to the house, and came back again to the

stable, and missed my waistcoat; I had left it the night before hanging up on one of the books in the stable, that we usually clean the bridles on; I saw the key in the morning lie upon the cell of the window, which I left in the waistcoat pocket; I went up stairs and found the groom's box broke open, his name is Richard Ainsworth ; the footman was with me at the time, we saw in the box, a two brown coats, a blue coat, and a hat, we wrote to the groom, who was in the Isle of Wight with my Lord.

Q. Did he leave the box open? - A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Did you ever see the waistcoat afterwards? - A. I saw it at Bow-street.


I am groom to Lord Lauderdale; I went to the Isle of Wight with his Lordship, the 3d of August; I left in my box a blue coat, and two brown coats, a 20l. note and a hat; I left the note in a little book in the box; I am not sure it was a Bank of England note; I had it of Mr. Beaumont, my Lord's Steward; I have never seen either of the brown coats, or the note, since the blue coat was left in.


I am a pawn-broker; I produce a coat and waistcoat; the woman brought the coat, and the lad brought the waistcoat.

Q. What colour is the coat? - A. Blue.

Q. When was that? - A. The coat on the 16th of September, and the waistcoat on the 11th; I have known the woman four or five years.


I apprehended Mary Stone on the 15th of January, at the Portland-arms, Portland-street; and coming along, she acknowledged she had the 20l. note of the prisoner Wolfe; she said, she changed it; she gave him 6l. odd out of it, and kept the rest herself; she said, Wolfe found it in Oxford-road; I asked her if she had pawned any cloaths for Wolfe, she said, she had pawned a coat in Berwick-street, and another in Oxford-road; she said, the pawned the coat in Berwick-street for a guinea, and gave him 12s. out of it; she said, she had lost the duplicate; I went with her to the shop, and they produced it.

Q.(To Taylor). Do you know any thing of this boy? - A. Yes; I knew him through his brother, who is a very honest fellow; I got him a place in a public-house, he behaved so bad he was turned away; the groom was so good as to take and keep him; sometimes he was in the stable with him.

Q.(To Taylor). Look at this waistcoat? - A. It is mine.

Wolfe. I have nothing to say.

Wolfe. GUILTY, Of stealing the waistcoat, value 18d . (Aged 13.)

Transported for seven years .


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

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-53
SentenceDeath > respited

Related Material

206. JOHN HENRY GADE was indicted for feloniously causing and procuring to be falsely made, forged and counterfeited, a transfer of the sum of 50l. to be the interest or share of William Harrison , in the joint stock of Three percent. Consolidated Bank Annuites, with intent to defraud the said William Harrison , and the Governor and Company of the Bank of England .

(The case was opened by Mr. Fielding).

(A part of the will of John Haward was read, dated 21st of October, 1787).

"Also I give and bequeath to my grand son," William Harrison , the sum of 50l. his share in"the joint stock of Three percent. Consolidated"Bank Annuities."

The executors are, " John Henry Gade and Hen-"ry Harland."


I am the parish clerk of Working, in Surrey.

Q. Did you know John Howard, who died in 1788? - A. Yes; I was a witness to his will.

Q. Do you know his daughter Mary? - A. Yes; she married one Harrison; I know nothing of young Harrison.

Q. Where did Harrison live? - A. At Wey-bridge.


Q. Were you the daughter of John Howard of Woking? - A. Yes.

Q. Is that young man your son, (pointing to him)? - A. Yes.

Q. You married a Mr. Harrison, a shoemaker? - A. Yes.

Q. What is his name? - A. James.

- UNWIN sworn.

Q. You are a stock-broker? - A. No, I am not; I transfer stock.

Mr. Jackson. Q. Is there not an order of the Bank of England, that no person shall make transfers, but regular brokers? - A. I know of no such order; On the 11th of January, I was applied to, by the prisoner at the bar, and Henry Harland , joint-executors of John Howard.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Had you transacted any business with Gade and Harland, on the business of this will before? - A. Yes; I made the transfers of the several legatees, as they came due; they applied to me, on the 11th of January, to transfer 50l. stock in the Three per cent. Consols, in the name of Harrison.

Q. Is this the ticket for the transfer, (shewing it him)? - A. Yes; that I delivered to the clerk of the Bank on that day.

The clerk read from the Bank book:

"11th of January, 1796."Us, John Henry Gade and Henry Harland,"executors to John Howard, late of Woking,"Surrey, gentleman, deceased, this 11th day of"January, in the year of our Lord 1796, do assign"and transfer 50l. all his late interest or share in"the joint stock of Three percent. Annuities, di-"rected by an act of parliament of the 25th year"of the reign of King George II. entitled 'an"act for converting the several annuities therein"mentioned into several joint stocks of annuities"transferrable at the Bank of England, and to be"charged on the sinking fund,' and by several sub-"sequent acts of Parliament, together with the"proportionate annuity of three per cent per an-"num attending the same, unto William Harri -"son, of York-street, Southwark, his executors,"administrators or assigns.

"Witness my hand,

" John Henry Gade, H. Harland,"

"Executors to John Howard , deceased."

"Witness, J. Sinee."

"I do voluntarily accept the above stock trans-"ferred to me." Without any signature.

"Witness to the identity of J. H. Gade and"H. Harland, executors to John Howard ."

"J. Unwin."

Q. How was Harrison described by them? - A. Gade, the prisoner, told me to put it down by his description, York-street, gentleman; he said he was a mariner.

Q. How came he to be described of York-street, Southwalk? - A. He desired me to put it down so, not having any regular place of habitation.

Q. Where did he describe Harrison to be at this time? - A. He said, he was at sea, and would return home in a short time: On the 14th of January, he came again, and said, the young man was come home; he wanted the money for the stock; and asked me if I would prepare a transfer for him; I told him, I would; he had a young man with him, whom, he told me, was the supposed William Harrison.

Q. Look at that young man in soldier's cloaths,(the real William Harrison ); was that the young man he had with him? - A. No.

Q. That is the ticket you made out upon that occasion, to deliver to the bank clerk? - A. It is.

Q.Was there any transfer made in pursuance of this ticket? - A. There was.(The clerk read from the Bank book):

"I William Harrison, of York-street, gentle-"man, this 14th day of January, 1796, do assign"and transfer 50l. all my interest or share in the"joint stock of Three per cent. Annuities, directed"by an act of parliament," &c."together with"the proportionable annuity of three per cent. per"annum attending the same, unto William West ,"Stock Exchange, G. T. his executors, admi-"nistrators and assigns. Witness, William Har -"risson." With two f's. "Witness to the iden-"tity of W. Harrisson, John Henry Gade ; known"to J. Unwin. 19926."

Note under" 45067. Witness J. Stone.

Q. Who was that John Henry Gade signed by? - A. The prisoner at the bar. I cannot be positive who was the Bank clerk that attended the transfer, but I think it was Mr. Bicknell; at the time of the transfer, there was an observation made upon the name of the person who signed it, that there were two f s put instead of one name, upon which, the prisoner was informed, that as there was a mistake in the transfer of the name, there must be an affidavit made, to prove him to be one and the same person; I informed him, that he must go with me to the clerk who usually makes out affidavits, but he was not there; I desired him to wait till I came to him again; and when I returned, they had absconded.

Q. Who had absconded? - A. The prisoner, and the young man be brought with him to represent Harrison.

Court. Q. Who was it that signed the name of William Harrisson in this way to this transfer? - A. I cannot say who it was; it was a young man that he represented to be William Harrison .

Q. Was there any money paid, for this transfer, by West, to whom it was made? - A. West paid it to me, and I had it for a week, supposing they would come back for the money, but they did not.

Q. Every thing upon the transfer, so far as the transfer was concerned, was complete? - A. Yes.

Q. After this, did you ever see the young man or the prisoner again? - A. On the 25th of January, I met the prisoner, and apprehended him; I never saw the young man again.

Mr. Jackson. It is my duty to submit to your Lordship, under the correction of your Lordship, the objection I now take, at the moment that transfer is about to be offered to your Lordship, as purporting to be a proof of an interest in Harrison. My Lord, I take it, that not only all indictments, should bring the words within

the express Act of Parliament, but that the evidence should also bring the facts within the express words of the indictment. The indictment here charges this man with forging, or causing to be forged, a certain transfer. Now, my Lord, I humbly submit to your Lordship, that that which is charged to be forged and counterfeited, and that under which Harrison is said to derive his interest, is not a transfer; and that under that, Harrison had no legal interest. My Lord, to complete and constitute a transfer, it must be signed by the party transferring, and accepted by the transferee, and it has been admitted by the candour of the learned Gentleman who opened this case, that the latter constituent part is entirely wanting; that Harrison did not accept this transfer, which the executors on their part undertook to convey to him. And, my Lord, without these formalities, I submit to your Lordship, that it is that sort of thing which could convey no currency, and consequently no imposition upon society; that it is nothing more than a dead letter; that under which, no dividend could be received, and upon which no action could be maintained; but, my Lord, I do not stop here, for the Act of Parliament will be admitted to apply to every fund constituted by Government, and which is inserted in the very act, creating those funds, and the second section of that act runs thus: "And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that it shall and may be lawful for the Governor and Company of the Bank of England,"&c. (reading the clause of the act).

My Lord, I therefore submit, that that which is stated to have been a legal interest in Harrison, could not be a legal interest, inasmuch as it wanted that sort of formality, constituting an interest in law.

The learned Gentleman, in his opening, has endeavoured to establish a distinction between a transfer on the part of legatees, and to an ordinary purchaser; from whatever source the learned Gentleman may have drawn that distinction I know not; sure I am, that the highest authority he can produce is a loose and lax, and perhaps reprehensible practice; but your Lordship will adhere to that sort of practice only, which by the act is expressed in terms as strong as language can be. My Lord, I will suppose for a moment, the converse of the proposition, and that, instead of this being a signature, without an acceptance, it had been an acceptance without a signature; is it possible to suppose, that such an instrument could be in law, capable of that sort of forgery, now charged upon the prisoner. My Lord, it can no more be said, that such a thing is a transfer, than that the preparation of a deed of assignment can be called an assignment, wanting the names of the parties.

My Lord, I will refer your Lordship to two cases in my humble judgment, extremely in point; the first is the case of the King and Mossatt, tried at the Old-Bailey Sessions, in January 1787; it is in Mr. Leach's book 337." John Mossatt was indicted on the statute 2 George II . chap. 25, and 7 George II . chap. 22, before Mr. Sergeant Adair, Recorder, for forging a bill of exchange for three guineas;" an objection was taken that it was not stamped agreeable to the statutes of 23 George III . chap. 49, and 24 George III . statute I. chap. I, which enact, in order to restrain them under a limited sum, that the place of abode shall be described, and other particulars; and the section concludes with saying, that all notes and bills of exchange negociated under this act, shall hereby be declared to be void. My Lord, in that case, the question referred to the Judges, was, whether if the bill of exchange set forth in the indictment be void by the above statutes, the forging of it can become the subject of a capital offence, within the meaning of those statutes. In February sessions, 1787, Mr. Justice Gould signified that the Judges had taken this case into their consideration, but that they thought it a subject which required further deliberation. In the May Sessions following, Mr. Justice Ashhurst delivered their unanimous opinion, that as the forgery was committed before the expiration of the statutes 15 George III . chap. 51, and 17 George III. chap. 30; the bill of exchange, if real, would not have been valid or negociable, and that therefore the forging of it was not a capital offence. I submit with great deference to your Lordship, that this is a still stronger case than that which I am this day called upon to defend, in-as much as the bill of exchange was that sort of thing, which, by currency in society, might obtain, but not so in the present case; this could not legally be transferred to a second person; no second person could receive a dividend, or maintain an action under it; but is for want of that grand legal formality enjoined by the statute, a dead letter.

My Lord, there is another case within the present experience of your Lordships, that I own appears to me analogous to this, because, if this be a transfer, it is not the thing charged in the indictment as an instrument establishing an interest in Harrison; I mean the case of Lyon, who was indicted for forging a certain receipt, or acquittance, purporting to be a receipt; it was demurred to, that the instrument was neither a receipt nor an acquittance, inasmuch as it was not filled up by the name of the person from whom the money was received.

The opinion of the Judges was delivered in May, 1795, when one of your Lordships was pleased to say, "The"instrument must be set out, that the Court might see,"from its tenor, what it purported to be; and that it is"that which the law has protected. These receipts"ought to be filled up with the name of the subscriber;"it is then, and not before, an acknowledgement of the"payment of money, and becomes a receipt. If any"one takes a blank (for it is not a receipt), without a"name; he has no reason to complain of it as a fraud,"because, if he had looked, he must have seen that it"was no more than waste paper."

My Lord, I submit, therefore, that this piece of paper, called a transfer, is not a transfer, unless it be attended by those formalities enjoined by the statute; for those formalities, essential as they may be in this case, happen to be entirely absent; and that it is that which, for want of acceptance, conveys no legal interest to Harrison.

(Mr. Jackson was followed by Mr. Balmanno, on the same side; and on the part of the Crown, by Mr. Fielding, Mr. Knowlys, and Mr. Giles, to whom Mr. Jackson replied.)

Mr. Justice Lawrence. It appears to me, that this comes to the single question, whether the acceptance is a part of a transfer? if it is, the transfer is not complete; the indictment is for forging a transfer. Let us

see what a transfer is. - The Act says, that for all transfers of any sums of money, there shall be books kept, and an entry made of them; which entry shall be conceived in proper words for that purpose, and shall be signed by the persons making that assignment. It seems to me, that the transfer is complete on the part of the person who undertakes to assign that stock; however, if upon turning it more in my mind there should occur any reasonable doubt, then, unquestionably, in a case of life and death, I will take care that the opinion of the Judges shall be taken, if any doubt should occur to me that I am not aware of at present.


Examined by Mr. Giles. Q. Look at that book, did you fill up that transfer? - A. I did; on the 14th of January, the prisoner came to me with Mr. Unwin, and a young man whom I did not know, to execute a transfer; after it was filled up, the prisoner signed to the identity of the young man who had signed William Harrisson; as the young man was signing his name in the book, I saw him sign two f s, whereas the transfer was filled up with one; I asked him, if that was his regular mode of signing his name; he informed me it was; I told him it differed with our books, and we could not admit it as a legal transfer, unless he went before a Magistrate and made an affidavit; they then went from our office, and I never saw them after.

Q. Look at the young man in the soldier's cloaths, is that the young man? - A. I don't think it is.

Cross-examined by Mr. Jackson. Q. You are a clerk in the Bank? - A. Yes.

Q. Is there not a standing order among the Directors, that no transfer shall be made till it is previously accepted by the party?

Court. Q. Are not all the orders of the Bank Directors in writing? - A. I believe they are.

Mr. Jackson. Q. Do you not take orders from your superiors? - A. Most assuredly we do.

Court. You cannot examine as to that.

Prisoner's defence. I did not mean to rob my nephew, William Harrison; I had a little cottage to sell; I was in distress.

For the Prisoner.

- WALSH sworn.

Examined by Mr. Jackson. Q. I believe you are one of the superintendants of the Three per cent. Consols office? - A. I am.

Q. If the order be in writing, I have no right to ask you, but are you under such orders from your superiors, that no person shall transfer stock unless it is previously accepted by the party? - A. Public orders are stuck round the Bank of England, with clauses of the Act of Parliament.

Q. Do you know what extract, and from what Act of Parliament it is, that is adjoined to those orders so stuck up? - A. An extract from the clause "That all stock must be accepted before the transfer is made." In the Three per Cent office we don't stand for acceptance before the payment of the dividend; but we don't suffer it to be transferred till there is an acceptance, unless it is by mistake or inaccuracy.

Q. When dividends are about to be made, warrants are of course made out? - A. Yes.

Q. Is there any distinction made in those warrants, applicable to such as have, and such as have not been accepted? - A. In all the rest of the offices there are, but not in mine.

Q. Is there any check made in the ledger upon such occasions? - A. Yes; a mark, by which the clerk knows whether it is accepted or not.

Court. Q. The rule is, that dividends may be paid without acceptance, but cannot be transferred without acceptance? - A. Yes; there are positive orders from the Directors to that purpose.

Court. Q. Suppose a person who has not accepted the stock comes to transfer it, do you make it accepted first, and then transfer it? - A. I don't know that they do.

Mr. Fielding. Q. It does sometimes happen that it is done without acceptance, when it is done by stock-jobbers? - A. Yes; it is too often.

- SHARP sworn.

I have known the prisoner a great many years; I have always considered him as an honest industrious man.

Mr. Jackson. We have a very long lift of witnesses to his character.

Mr. Fielding. There is no doubt in the world but he had a very good character before this time.

GUILTY . Death . (Aged 60.)

Judgment respited for the opinion of the Judges .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-54
SentenceCorporal > public whipping; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

207. JAMES PROFIT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of January , thirty-two pieces of copper, called halfpence , the property of Alexander M'Gilray .


I have a shop in Fleet Market ; the prisoner acted as porter amongst the butchers in the market; I suspected, from observations that I made upon the lock; that my shop had been entered of a night for some considerable time back; and on the night of the 28th of January, I sat up all night, with my servant, James Brown ; and, at about a quarter past five in the morning, the prisoner at the bar came in by means of a pick-lock key, and went to the till

directly; he put his hand in and took out some halfpence; my man went up to him directly and seized him; I sent for a watchman, and gave charge of him immediately; he was searched at the watch-house, and there was found upon him sixteen pence in halfpence that I had marked the preceding afternoon, (produces some of them); they are marked by the point of a compass, in circular scores; I found this key in the door, (producing a key with open wards).

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. I believe this man bore a very good character in the market, and you were sorry you were obliged to prosecute him? - A. I did not wish to prosecute him.

Q. And you consented to his going for an East-India soldier, but he was not in a situation of body to go? - A. I did consent to that.

(The prisoner left his defence to his counsel, and called three witnesses, who gave him a good character.


Publickly whipped , and confined in the House of Correction six months .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-55

Related Material

208. JOHN PRITCHARD was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 21st of January , a saw, made of iron and steel, with a wooden handle, called a hand-saw, value 7s. the property of Robert Mendez .


I am a carpenter ; I work for Mr. James Hoare , in New-street, Bishopsgate Without: On Thursday, the 21st of January last, I was at work in Bishopsgate-street ; between three and four o'clock in the afternoon, I had occasion to go to my master's shop for some stuff; when I came into New-street I saw the prisoner at the bar come out of my master's shop, and put a saw under his coat; I asked him where he was going with it; he made answer, that he wanted to get a few tools together, to get a job of work; he said, he was a carpenter, (produces the saw). This is mine; here is a mark of T.M. upon it; an uncle of mine, Thomas Mendez , gave it me.

Prisoner's defence. I had been at work in Essex; I came up to go to the hospital, being very bad; I went to get some work to support three motherless children; I went in there to ask for work, and I saw this saw outside the door; I took it up, and then this man came, and said, I had got his saw; I told him, then I begged his pardon; he let me go fifty yards, and then came running after me again, and said, you old blackguard, you shall go and ask my master's pardon, before you go now.

Court. (To Mendez). Q. How far had he got from the shop when you took him? - A. About fifteen yards; as we came to Devonshire-street, he slipped from me, and ran five or six yards.

Jury. Are you sure you left the saw in the shop? - A. I cannot swear it, but I believe I left it in the shop; I had used it three or four hours before.

GUILTY . (Aged 54.)

Imprisoned one week, and passed to his parish .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-56
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

209. JOHN DEDERICK was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 16th of January , 6lb, weight of indigo, value 2l. 10s. the property of John Horton and Thomas Horton .


I am an indigo merchant , in Lawrence Pountney-lane , in partnership with Thomas Horton ; the prisoner was employed in our warehouse ; on the 16th of January in the morning, I was informed he had been stopped with some indigo upon him; I attended at the Mansion-house, and saw the indigo, but it is impossible for me to say that it is our property; and it would have been impossible for us to have missed it out of so large a quantity as we have.


I am an officer: On the 16th of January I stopped the prisoner with a quantity of indigo; I asked him where he had got it; he said his master had given it him to take over the water; I then told him I would go with him to his master, to know whether what he told me was truth or nor not; and then he said another man had given it to him whom he did not know, and I thought it my duty to put him in the Compter.


Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-57
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

210. JOHN BRAVO was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 3d of February , a wooden box, value 6d. a japan box, value 1s. three yards of thread lace, value 3s. a silk sash, value 1s. and a pair of steel snuffers, value 2s. the property of Margaret Holbird , widow .


I am a mantua-maker, at London-wall; the things were lost from Mitre-court, Duke's-place ; some gentlemen came for the King's-tax, and were to come again next day, and Jane Hindes looked out these things to sell towards making up the money; I looked over the things when John Bravo was by, put them in a box, and the next morning he told me they were gone; the next news

I heard was, that the gentlemen were on the premisses for the King's-tax; upon that I sent the prisoner for a broker, who told me that the prisoner had part of a telescope in his pocket, mounted with silver; I sent down for the officer, who was upon the premisses, who searched him, and the telescope was found upon him.

Q. What was there in the box? - A. Some edging, a pair of snuffers, a sash, and some other articles; they have been in the officer's possession ever since.


On the 3d of February the prisoner came in and said, these things were gone; the officer was in the house for the King's taxes; he searched him, and some of the property was found upon him, and he owned to the other, which the officer has had ever since.


I am a constable; on the third of February, 1796, I was in possession of Mrs. Holbird's house for the King's tax; Esther Cavannah gave me charge of the prisoner; in his pocket I found a broken telescope tipped with silver; she said she would swear to that being in the box when I packed them up; I told the prisoner I should take him to the Compter; he said, for God's sake don't take me, I will tell you where the things are; I made him no promises at all; I asked him where they were, and he said, in Golden-Fleece-Court, in the Minories, in a cellar which he paid a groat a week for the use of to keep his baskets in; he sells fruit about the street; I went with him and found the things covered over with some hay; I brought him back to Mrs. Holbird's, and the box with me; Esther Cavannah informed me they were all right; that is all I know, (produces the things).

(To Esther Cavannah). Look at these things; whose property are they? - A. Mrs. Holbird's; she is confinement.

Prisoner's defence. While she was in trouble, I moved all the furniture for her as quick as I could, for fear they should be seized; and I went to her in prison, and she desired me to sell these things to pay the taxes; I shewed the constable where I had put them for safety; I am as innocent as the child unborn.

Q.(To Cavannah). What is Mrs. Holbird in consinement for? - A. For keeping a disorderly house, I believe.

Q. Did the prisoner remove any of the things to avoid the taxes? - A. No.

Q.(To Hindes.) Did the prisoner remove any of the things that they should not be seized? - A. Not to my knowledge; the officer seized the things for the taxes, and sold the things for them.

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


Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-58
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

211. WILLIAM GRIFFITH was indicted, for that he on the King's highway, in and upon Henry Smith did make an assault, on the 8th of February , putting him in fear, and taking from his person a linen handkerchief, value 1s. the property of the said Henry .(The case was opened by Mr. Raine).


Last Monday fortnight, about five minutes before eleven o'clock, between Chancery-lane and Temple-bar , I was accosted by a girl; while I was talking to her, about a minute, a man came along the pavement, and ran against us; I called to him, and asked him what he meant; he came back, and abused me, and called me a blackguard; and after abusing me he struck at me over the head; I was going to return the blow, and was hit again from another quarter and knocked down; when I got up I turned round, and the prisoner had got his hand in my pocket, and with my turning round, his hand was so entangled he could not get it out; I immediately seized him by the collar, pushed him against the wall, and a gentleman came up and laid hold of him on the other side; the prisoner was not the man that struck me; I had not seen him in the crowd before; he was seen to drop a handkerchief from behind his coat; it was picked up and given to Mr. Rowe.

Q. Did you feel his hand in your pocket? - A. Yes; he had hold of a little pocket-book.

Q. How far had the man got beyond you before he came back? - A. I suppose close to Temple-bar; he was running along the pavement.

Q. He did not return back till you called him? - A. No; I called after him, and asked him what he meant; I did not see the prisoner with him.

Prisoner. He cannot say I had my hand in his pocket. - A. I am sure, I swear to it, and to his person.


I am a stationer in Fleet-street; I was coming home a little before eleven; there was a crowd in the street; I went to see what was the matter, and saw the prisoner's hand in Mr. Smith's pocket; I immediately collared him, and called out "watch;" the watchman came up, and took him; I picked up the handkerchief, which I believe came from Mr. Smith's pocket; I did not see it in his hand; I gave it to the constable at the watchhouse.


Last Monday fortnight, about eleven o'clock, I was coming down Fleet-street, I saw seven or eight people together; I crossed the way, and saw two men who had hold of the prisoner by the collar; I saw him put his hand behind him, and drop the handkerchief.


I was going along Fleet-street, about eleven o'clock in the evening, I saw Mr. Smith knocked down by another man, not the prisoner; and immediately as Mr. Smith got up, I saw the prisoner follow him, and put his hand into his pocket; I saw the handkerchief drop, but did not observe who dropped it. I don't know who the man was that knocked him down, I did not see him in company with the prisoner.


I am constable of the parish of St. Dunstan's in the West; the prisoner was brought to the watch-house by Henry Smith , and another gentleman; I found nothing upon him but a half-crown-piece; a handkerchief was delivered to me; I have had it ever since, (produces it.)

Smith. This is my handkerchief, it is marked with my initials H.S.

Prisoner's defence. I came home between ten and eleven o'clock; there was a great mob in the street, I went to see what was the matter, and pressed against this gentleman, my hand might be upon his pocket; I am as innocent as a child unborn.(The prisoner called four witnesses, who gave him a good character.)

GUILTY, Of stealing, but not violently . (Aged 36.)

Fined 1s. and confined in the House of Correction six months .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-59
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s

Related Material

212. ELIZABETH BARNES was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 19th of January , a man's cloth coat, value 50s. a muslin waistcoat, value 10s. a pair of brown velveret breeches, value 10s. a linen gown, value 10s. a dimity petticoat, value 5s. a muslin apron, value 2s. a muslin handkerchief, value 2s. and a white calico bed-gown, value 1s. the property of Thomas Sheffield , in his dwelling-house .


I am a lamp-lighter , I live in Silk-street ; my wife and child were bad of a fever, I got the prisoner to take care of them, not being able to take care of themselves; the child died while she was at our house, and my wife got well; I told her the Sunday after the child died, that she must get herself a place, and gave her leave to stay with us till she could get one, and she thanked us for it; my wife went out to see for a bit of ground for the child; I went about my business, and left the prisoner at home about half past four o'clock; I told her we should be at home about seven. After I had done work, I went to my wife; we returned about eight o'clock, found the door locked, and nobody at home; she had left the key next door; when I had got the key, and opened the door, I saw the prisoner's shoes on the floor; I went up stairs, and found a box of mine open, that was left locked; I am sure it was locked, because, as we sweat very much in our business, I went up for a handkerchief, and, the box being locked, I could not get one, I missed the things mentioned in the indictment,(repeating them); we went in search of the things to the pawnbrokers, but could not find them; the constable found my wife's cloaths upon her; my coat was found at Mr. Parker's, the pawnbroker, by the constable.


On the 20th of January, the prosecutor came to me; and on Saturday the 23d, at six o'clock in the evening, I found her at the Four Swans Ian, Bishopsgate-street; she had on this gown, apron, handkerchief, and petticoat, (producing them); I asked her what she had done with the man's cloaths? she told me she had pledged the coat with Mr. Parker, in Grub-street; and the waistcoat and breeches, with Mr. Crouch, in Fore-street; she told me she had left her own cloaths where she took these from; I immediately went and took Mrs. Sheffield with me to identify the things.

Q.(To Sheffield.) Look at those things; are they the articles you left in the box? - A. Yes; they are my property.


I am sure these things are my property.

Prisoner's defence. The woman desired me to put her cloaths on, and go out and walk the streets, and bring her in some money; and if I did not, she would turn me out of the house directly; she had the money that I pawned these things for.

Q.(To Mrs. Sheffield.) Did you desire her to put your cloaths on? - A. No, I did not.

Q. She says you had the money that they were pawned for? - A. No; I left them in my box locked up, when I went out.

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 38s . (Aged 23.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-60
VerdictsNot Guilty

Related Material

213. JOHN ELLISMERE and DAVID SLOKAM were indicted, the first for feloniously

stealing, on the 15th of February , a bullock, value 24l. the property of William Smith .

Second Count. Laying it to be the property of James Alexander ; and the other, for feloniously receiving the same, knowing it to have been stolen .

(The case was opened by Mr. Knowlys.)


I am a grazier in Gloucestershire. Last Monday fe'nnight I assisted my man in bringing some beasts into the market in the morning, and, about nine o'clock, I sold Mr. Alexander several beasts, among which was the ox in question, for 24l. 10s; when I sold him, he was with thirty-four others in the drove; he was about eight years old, a fellow to six other beasts that had been all worked together for several years, single in harness, as horses draw.

Q. Was he a gamesome ox, likely to stray? - A. Quite the reverse; he was very much cut up by his journey; if he had been taken away, and had been at liberty, he would certainly have returned to his fellows, from his attachment to them, if he had been at a small distance. About half an hour after I had sold him, Mr. Alexander's drover came to fetch him, and the others from the drove, and he was missing. The prisoner, Slokam, is a master drover in Smithfield ; I have known him for years; he employs sometimes twenty men under him to keep the graziers oxen together, and tie them to the rails. On missing the bullock, I turned round, and offered 40l. reward for the person that had taken him upon conviction.

Q. Had you seen Slokam that morning? - A. Yes, and was insulted by him as usual; I used to employ him, and turned him off.

Q. Do you know the Bear and Ragged Staff? - A. Yes; it is about one hundred and fifty yards from where I was, the other side of Smithfield. Slokam came to me about half an hour after the beast was missing, and said, I must either drop, or come down a Quid before I could, or then I might have him again, or some such expression; I perfectly understood his meaning; it is a cant name for a guinea in Smithfield; I took no notice to him, but I was determined to lose the bullock rather than give a guinea to reward villainy; in the afternoon, he asked me it I had found my bullock; I told him I had not; he said, if I would give him a guinea, he would endeavour to find him, having heard of a bullock at Hackney, and that he would saddle his horse immediately and go after him; I made him no reply, but went to Bow-street; I directed my book-keeper, whose name is Bovill, to go and offer Slokam half a guinea to look for the bullock; I went to the prisoner, Slokam's house, in Bowling alley, Cow-cross, and found him in bed; I offered him half a guinea to find it; he said he would do nothing for half a guinea, but for a guinea he would, I told him I wanted to go out of town early next morning; he said I might depend upon it he should be found, and I might go; I told him to take him to Mr. Henry Smith 's, No. 120, Goswell-street; he said he had no doubt but he should bring him as soon as it was light; I told him, upon delivery to him, he would pay him a guinea; I lodged an information at Bow-street, and the next morning, about seven o'clock, the Bow-street officers took the two prisoners standing with the bullock at Mr. Smith's door, and they were taken to Bow-street and committed.

Q. Was that the same bullock that you had missed? - A. Yes; it had both my mark and Mr. Alexander's.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knapp. Q. You have known Slokam many years? - A. I suppose five years; he has been a drover all that time.

Q. Mr. Alexander bought the bullock, you know; - A. Yes, for 24l. 10s.

Q. It was a good bargain for you, you know? - A. The bullock was worth the money, and the money was worth him.

Q. If it was Mr. Alexander's bullock that he had paid for, how came you to order him to be sent to Mr. Smith's, in Goswell-street? - A. Because I must have given Mr. Alexander back the money, and Mr. Smith had got a convenient place to put it in till the next market day, when I could sell it again, if Mr. Alexander did not chuse to take it.

Q. Is it not usual to deliver the bullocks in Smithfield as soon as they are paid for? - A. No.

Q. Why did you suppose Mr. Alexander would not take it? - A. I did not know, but my not delivering it to him the day he bought it, he might be obliged to buy another.

Q. You found it at the very place it was ordered to be taken to? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know whether slokam was by when you offered 40l.? - A. I cannot say, but, in my own mind, I don't doubt it, because I made it as public as I could.

Q. He said you must come down a Quid, that is a guinea? - A. Yes, before I should have it again, that after I had offered 40l. reward; I come up to Smithfield once a fortnight, generally from Christmas till after Lady-day; I am not very regular.

Q. You never heard of a stray bullock? - A. Yes, in that stile.

Q. You never heard of a stray bullock being recovered? - A. I have heard of their being recovered in that way, but I would scorn to recover any of mine in that way.

Q.Is not the Bear and Ragged Staff a usual place for stray bullocks to be taken to? - A. It is very

possible, but it is a house I never went to in my life; I have heard since that it is; it is a place, like many others round Smithfield, when butchers cannot pay for their beasts, they are locked up there.

Q. Did you understand any thing more than that he would use his endeavours to find him? - A. I understood that he knew very well where he was.


About nine o'clock on Monday evening, Mr. Smith sent for me to the Greyhound, and desired me to go to Slokam, which I did; he was in bed and asleep; I went into his room and waked him; I told him Mr. Smith wanted to go out of town in the morning, and I had a commission to give him half a guinea, if he would tell him where the bullock was; he said he would not go under a guinea, and then I left him.


I live at the Bear and Ragged Staff; I know Slokam very well. Yesterday fe'nnight Ellismere brought a bullock in, and put it in the pen along with more than a score of others, it might be between twelve and two o'clock; he said, if any body came and described the marks, and paid for locking it up, they might have it.

Q.Where is this place of your's, is it up a yard or in the street? - A. Right up the yard backwards; it is a noted place for beasts; a long place that would hold fifty, I dare say.

Q. Is is open over-head? - A. Yes; there are several doors to it; some that you can see through, and some that you cannot; some with pieces of board cut out for light to look through, or put your hand through.

Q.Did you see Slokam there? - A. No; I did not.

Q. Who came for it? - A. I was not present when it was delivered.

Mr. Knapp. This beast was put in your yard, which is a place where beasts are usually put in? - A. Yes.


I am servant at the Bear and Ragged-staff; I delivered the bullock to both the prisoners, between six and seven o'clock on Tuesday morning.

Q. Had you seen it at all before that? - A. No.

Cross-examined by Mr. Trebeck. Q. You knew these men very well, and if they had come for half a dozen beasts, you would have delivered them? - A. To Slokam I should, he locks up a great many beasts at our house.


I am an officer belonging to Bow-street: On the 15th, about six in the morning, I went to Goswell-street, and saw the prisoners driving a bullock towards Mr. Smith's; William Anthony laid hold of Slokam, and I laid hold of Ellismere, and we took them to Bow-street.


Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. Justice LAWRENCE.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-61
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment

Related Material

214. ALEXANDER CASEY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 11th of February , a wooden cask, value 2s. and one hundred and thirty pounds of iron nails, value 30s. the property of John Sannam , Robert Waghorn , Thomas Knight , John Blake , Henry Ventris , John England , Jonas Deare , Timothy Hewlett , Thomas Hinton , and Joseph Sabine .


I know nothing of the robbery.


I am a labourer, I work at Botolph Wharf: On the 11th of this month, about two o'clock, the prisoner and four or five more came down; I was unloading the cart, and just as I had done unloading, I saw the prisoner roll away a cask of nails off the quay; I went round and met the prisoner almost at the top of the gateway in Thames-street; I asked him where he was going with it, he said, what was that to me, he was going to St. Katherine's; I told him he had brought it off the quay, I took him into custody, and secured the cask.


I am a labourer: On Wednesday the 11th of this month, about half past two o'clock, I saw the prisoner going up the gateway with the cask, I went and stopped him; he said, two men below told him to roll it up; the cask was upon Lyon's Wharf; it is my master's property.


I am a constable in Billingsgate-ward; I was sent for to take charge of the prisoner; that is all I know about it.

Q.(To Sabine). What are you? - A. A gangsman ; I have the whole care of Lyon's Wharf , and of all the goods that go on and off, upon all occasions.

Q. Who are your partners? - A. Robert Waghorn, &c. (repeating them).

Q. What does this cask contain? - A. Ten thousand nails, thirteen pounds to the thousand, they came from Foster-lane, (the cask produced in Court); this is the identical cask, and I have an account of the contents of it from the house it came from, the mark on it is, "I. T. No. 100."

Prisoner's defence. I was walking on the quay, and a man came up and asked me, if I wanted a job, and he told me to roll a few of these casks up the

gateway, and he would satisfy me for my trouble, and then I was stopped by these men, and could not find the man that employed me.(The prisoner called John Johnson , serjeant in the Coldstream regiment of guards, who gave him an excellent character).

Q.(To Williams). Was he drunk or sober at this time? - A. I think he was a little in liquor.

GUILTY . (Aged 20.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned one month .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-62
SentenceCorporal > public whipping; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

215. JOHN CASTLE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 2d of February , a linen apron, value 1s. the property of Moses Hill .

MARY HILL sworn.

I am the wife of Moses Hill; I live in Gunpowder-alley, East-Harding-street ; I went out between two and three o'clock, on the 2d of February; I returned near upon three; I went to speak to a lady in the two pair of stairs, and she said, your door opens; I called, and nobody answered; I went down, and overtook the prisoner on the stairs; I asked him who he wanted, and he asked for a name that I do not recollect; I said he had been in my room, and taken something out; he said, he had not, and immediately took an apron out of his right hand pocket, and put it down in the window-seat; I then cried, "stop-thief," and got assistance.

Q. Was he sober? - A. He was, for all I know.

Q.Was that apron your's? - A. Yes; I had just taken it from before me; I know it by a string that is sewed on one side, which had broke off.


I heard the man upon the stairs; Mrs. Hill cried,"stop thief, and murder;" I came out of my room and saw the man trying to get away from her; he said, "Pray Ma'am, let me go; I have taken nothing else;" he repeatedly said, "if you will let me go, I will go down upon my knees to you;" further assistance was got, and he was delivered to the officer, who searched him, and took out of his left hand pocket a light-coloured handkerchief; I looked at him, and recollected, that about a fortnight or three weeks before, he asked for a lodger of the name of Bowland.


I work for Mr. Hill; as I was returning from dinner, I met the prisoner, I gave way for him; he moved his hat to me, and thanked me for my civility; I had not been at work above five minutes, when I heard the cry of stop thief; I went down, and found the prisoner in custody; he said, he had done it for want, and he would go down upon his knees, and do any thing; that he had only taken an apron.


I am an officer; I was sent for to apprehend the prisoner: I found these keys upon him, (producing them).

Prisoner's defence. The two small keys belong to two boxes of mine; and the other two are old keys belonging to a house that I have lett, lately, in Marybone parish: as to stealing the apron, I never was in that person's room in my life; I went to enquire for a person of the name of Bowland.

Singleton. He told me he had taken nothing but this apron; that he lived in the Borough, and I found afterwards, that he lodged in Mary-le-bonne.

Prisoner. I did at that time; for I had lett my house at Mary-le-bonne, before I went into business; I was a gentleman's coachman, and was endeavouring to get into the same situation again; and I had the promise of one from a gentleman that I did live with; I have lived with Mr. Cade, in Charlotte-street, Bloomsbury; I lived with Sir Henry Cheare, seven years; and with a gentleman at Kentish Town five years; my witnesses have been attending here three days, but are not here now.

GUILTY . (Aged 54.)

Publickly whipped and imprisoned six months .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-63
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment

Related Material

216. JOHN HOLLIER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 25th of January , eleven pair of worsted stockings, value 20s. the property of Samuel Richard Bennet .


I am servant to Mr. Bennet, of Houndsditch , hatter and hosier : About seven o'clock in the evening, the 25th of January, I was in the shop; I saw the prisoner come into the shop and take eleven pair of blue worsted stockings, and run away with them; I ran after him and cried stop thief; he fell down before he got above a dozen yards from the house; I got up to him and laid hold of his jacket; and by the assistance of another person, brought him back to the shop, with the hose.


On the 25th of January, about the hour of seven in the evening, as I was drinking tea in the parlour, I went forward to see where the lad was, and there was nobody in the shop; I went to the shop door, and saw the last witness have hold of the prisoner's jacket; with the assistance of two persons I brought him back, with the property in his hand, (they were produced); these are mine, they have my mark

upon them; the prisoner asked, who was master of the shop; I told him, I was; he said, don't use me ill, there is your property; I stole it for a person, who he would not then tell; we sent for the constable, and gave charge of him; and he took him before the Magistrate; before the Magistrate, he confessed he stole the property.

Prisoner's defence. Going down Hounsditch, I saw a man drop the property; I took it up; the man ran away, and they laid hold of me.

(The prisoner called William Harris , serjeant in the first regiment of guards, who had known him four years, gave him a very good character, and deposed that he behaved exceeding well on the Continent).

GUILTY . (Aged 23.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned for one month .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-64
VerdictGuilty; Guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > military naval duty

Related Material

217. WILLIAM PEAT and ROBERT PEAT were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 23d of January , a swansdown waistcoat, value 7s. the property of Nicholas Carter .


I am servant to Mr. Nicholas Carter , salesman , No.15, Giltspur-street : On Saturday, the 22d of January, between one and two o'clock, I had seen the two prisoners about the door; I saw one of them (William) unpin a swansdown waistcoat from the door, and the other ran away with it; I gave intelligence to my master, and he pursued them; the prisoner (Robert) threw down the waistcoat; my master caught him, and took him to the Compter; the other was taken about five o'clock the same day, going by our door, I suppose, to see his companion, he was in the Compter; I am sure the two prisoners are the men, I had seen them before; I took particular notice of him, that I might know him again.


I am a salesman, in Giltspur-street: On Saturday, between one and two, I saw one of the prisoners, he in the brown coat, unpin the waistcoat; the other immediately took it, and ran away with it; I pursued him, and took him at the second Hospital gate; I immediately carried him to the Compter; this is the waistcoat, (producing it); it has my mark upon it; I am sure he is the same man; I never lost sight of him.

William Peat's defence. I had not been with my brother the space of three hours, when I was taken, they detained me, and said I was with him.

Robert Peat 's defence. I never had the waistcoat in my hand; going through Giltspur-street, I heard a cry of stop thief, and they said I had the waistcoat.(The prisoner Robert called William Hurst , who had known him five years, and gave him a good character).

William Peat, GUILTY . (Aged 20.)

Robert Peat, GUILTY . (Aged 24.)

Sentences respited to go into the army .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-65
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

218. JOSEPH DAVISON was indicted for feloniously stealing thirteen hempen bags, value 10s. and an earthen bason, value 1s. the property of Robert Kierman , William Langdon , Edward Harvey , and Thomas Beckworth .

JOHN COCK sworn.

I am servant to Robert Kierman , William Langdon , Edward Harvey, and Thomas Beckworth, druggists , in Giltspur-street : On Tuesday morning, the 16th of February, about a quarter past seven, I saw the prisoner come to his work as usual; he was our porter; in the course of five minutes after, I saw him come into the counting-house, and, taking the keys, he went into the yard, and unlocked the gate; I went out of the counting-house into the street; I saw the prisoner come out; he saw me at the door, and he went in again; I withdrew, and went up the stair-case, and threw up the window that looked into the street; I immediately saw him come out with a bag upon his back; I directly ran down stairs and out at the counting-house door, into Cock-lane; I saw the prisoner before me; I followed him down the lane and up Snow-hill, into Sea-coal-lane; there I stopped him; I asked him where he was going to; he was so much terrified, he could not tell me; he said, he would go back again; I asked him, what he had got there; and he said, bags; I asked him to put them down; and I looked into them, and found nothing but thirteen bags, and a bason near the bottom; I desired him to take them back into the counting-house, which he did; and I sent him over the way to his work.

Cross-examination. Q. How long have you lived with the prosecutors? - A. Nine years, and upwards; the prisoner had lived there eight or nine months.

Q. He has a large family of children? - A. Yes; three small ones.


I am one of the partners in this house: I know these bags, by the mark on one of them corresponding with the warehouse book.

Q. You do not know the bason? - A. It is used for a particular purpose in the laboratory, and is fit for no other use; before I had seen him, he made

his escape out of the warehouse window; he was followed and brought back; he acknowledged the fact; he fell down on his knees, and said it was his first offence; that he was going to carry potatoes in these bags; I asked him if he dealt in potatoes? he said no; but he was going to deal in them.

Q. How did he behave in your service? - A. Very well.

- JOSLIN sworn.

In consequence of a search-warrant, I went and searched his apartments, and found nothing; his wife was very willing to let me search every part of the house.

For the Prisoner.


The prisoner lived porter with me; he was one of the honestest porters I ever had.

GUILTY . (Aged 41.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned in Newgate one week .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-66

Related Material

220. JOSEPH HAGGETT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 16th of February , two coach-glasses, value 12s. the property of Joshua Rivers .


I keep a livery stable in Fann-street, Aldersgate-street , I lost the glasses out of the yard; I keep a hackney-coach, it goes out about eight or nine in the day, and comes home about eleven or twelve at night; there is a gallery at the bottom of the yard, where a few people live, we lock the gate and leave the wicket open; about six o'clock in the morning, my servant found the coach-door open, and the glasses gone; and I heard a man had been stopped with them by the watchman, in Old-street, or Golden-lane, and called me up immediately.

- WATSON sworn.

I am headborough in St. Luke's parish; it was my night up at the watchhouse; the 16th of this month I was walking down Golden-lane, as I generally do once or twice in the night; I heard two people coming up on the other side of the way talking one to the other, this was a little before three in the morning; I heard them making use of bad words; I crossed over to them, and seeing me crossing over, they walked along rather faster; as soon as I got to the corner, they turned up Playhouse-yard; I saw the glasses between the men, they were carrying them in their hands, and they made a great rattling one against the other, which gave me a suspicion they had got something they should not have; seeing me follow, the other went forward, and this man dropped the glasses, and I stopped him.

Q.Were the glasses broke? - A. No; they were set down by the wall, and were not damaged at all.(produces them).

Q. Are you sure the prisoner had the possession of these two glasses? - A. Yes; I made a particular remark of him, his coat being out at both elbows, and his shirt hanging out.

Rivers. This glass is mine; there were four lost out of the yard, only one of these is mine; they left each a stick in my ride, the one on one side, the other on the other.

Prisoner's defence. I was coming round Golden-lane, I turned the corner of Playhouse-yard, and the watchman laid hold of me, and took me to the watchhouse, and afterwards brought two glasses, and asked if I knew any thing of them; I know nothing of them.

GUILTY . (Aged 24.)

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second London jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-67
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > newgate

Related Material

221. MARY BERREY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 2d of February , a satin waistcoat, value 2s. a kerseymere waistcoat, value 5s. a linen waistcoat, value 1s. a muslin apron, value 2s. and a linen sheet, value 2s. 6d. the property of Samuel Pincott .


I live in Leatherseller's-buildings, London-wall ; I am the wife of Samuel Pincott , my husband is a stage-coachman ; the prisoner was my servant , she has lived with me four months, and has been robbing me ever since she has lived with me; I missed some things, she denied knowing any thing of them; I went into the kitchen, and desired her to tell what she had done with my things? she denied having them; the next day, I went to the Lord-Mayor, and got a constable; Newman searched her, and found thirteen duplicates upon her, belonging to four different pawnbrokers.

- NEWMAN sworn.

I am a constable; I was sent for to search the prisoner, on the 2d of February; I found thirteen duplicated sewed up in her petticoat, twelve of them proved to be Mrs. Pincott's property.


I live with Alexander Price , No. 70, London-wall; seven of these duplicates are mine, (produces three waistcoats, an apron, a sheet, a petticoat, and a remnant of cotton, which, Mrs. Pincott says, is the prisoner's own property). I took the three waistcoats in of the prisoner at the bar; my master's young man took in the other things, he is not here; the tickets correspond with the tickets on them; I know the

waistcoats perfectly well, I made part of one of them myself; the apron has got a letter, only, in and I know the sheet.

Prisoner's defence. The prosecutor assured me, if I would give an account of the things; she would forgive me; I went down on my knees to her.

GUILTY . (Aged 55.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned in Newgate one month .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-68
VerdictGuilty > theft under 40s
SentenceMiscellaneous > military naval duty

Related Material

222. THOMAS COLLIER was indicted for breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Tyrrell , about the hour of nine in the forenoon of the 18th of February , Letitia, his wife, being therein; and feloniously stealing a silver watch, value 4l. a base metal watch-chain, value 2s. a stone seal set in base metal, value 4d. a base metal watch-key, value 1d. a base metal trinket, value 1d. and a mahogony tea-caddie, value 3s. the property of William Tyrrell .


I am the wife of William Tyrrell , a coal-heaver I live in Water-lane : On Thursday, the 18th of February, I saw a man in the front room on the ground-floor, with a tea-caddie in his hand, about two minutes past nine in the morning.

Q. Is it your house? - A. No; Mr. Flindall's next door; I am a lodger; it is let out in separate apartments, I have the ground-floor.

Q. The landlord does not live there at all? - A. No; I was in the back room, and saw the prisoner in the front room; he went out of the room, I went after him, and called "stop thief."

Q. What did you see him do? - A. He took up the tea-chest in his hand that always stands upon the table; and when he saw me, he put it down again, and went out of the room, and ran away; I immediately called "stop thief;" a young man jumped over the window, and follow him; I did not go any further than the second door, I did not see him stopped; he was stopped by Richard Thorne , who is here; I did not miss the watch till I came back again; they brought the man back in the course of ten minutes. It was on the mantle-piece, hanging upon a book; it is a silver watch.

Q. Did you know any thing of the prisoner? - A. I know that is the man I saw in my room; I never saw him before to my knowledge.


I am a box-maker; I live two doors from Mr. Tyrrell's, in Water-lane; I was at work in the shop, I heard the cry of "stop-thief," I jumped over the window, I saw the prisoner and the prosecutrix; I pursued him as far as Shoe-lane, and there he was stopped by some dray-man, or dustman; I don't know which, but he let him go and I collared him directly; but before I came up to him, I saw him throw the watch down; I brought him back to the prosecutrix; he was given charge to a constable, who was coming by accidentally, and brought to the New Compter, and from thence to Guildhall; I gave the watch to the constable.


I heard an alarm of stop-thief; I ran out at the door and pursued him; I went as far as Shoe-lane, when our young man had got hold of him, I took hold of him on the other side, and brought him back, I did not see him drop the watch.


I am assistant to Moore and Hopley, druggists in Fleet-street: On Thursday morning last, I heard a cry of stop-thief, I saw the prisoner and pursued him down Shoe-lane; he was stopped by a drayman, he put his hand behind him, and dropped a watch, which I picked up and gave to the last witness.


I am constable of Farringdon-ward; I was coming by on Thursday morning, I saw a great many people down Water lane, I went to see what was the matter, and they gave me charge of the prisoner, and Thorn gave me charge of this watch, (producing it).

Prosecutrix. This is my watch, it was hanging over the mantle-piece.

Prisoner's defence. Last Thursday morning, I got up about seven o'clock to go to a relations in Northumberland-street, to take leave of her; I was going to a place called Ivinghoe, in Buckinghamshire; and coming down Fleet-street, I heard a cry of stop-thief; I saw many people running, I ran likewife; at the corner of Shoe-lane I was stopped by a man that I believe was a coal-heaver; I asked what was the matter, and the man seized my watch out of my fob, and said, I have got it, and a man saw a watch drop from among the crowd, that is all I know about it.(for the prisoner).


I am a clock engraver and varnisher; the prisoner is a coach-harness-maker by trade; I have known him from a lad; he had some money left him, and he came up out of the country.

Prisoner. I only came up out of the country, my Lord, last Sunday.

Court. (To Austin). Q. How long ago is it since you knew him at work? - A. About four months ago in Old-street-road, he always bore a

good character; I did not know any thing of this, till his mother came to me.

GUILTY, Of stealing to the value of 39s . (Aged 22.)

Judgment respited to go into the army .

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. COMMON SERGEANT.

17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-69
SentenceMiscellaneous > fine; Imprisonment > house of correction

Related Material

223. MARY HAMILTON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 24th of January , a quart pewter pot, value 20d. and a pint pewter pot, value 10d. the property of George Puffer .


I live at Knightsbridge , I am a victualler ; I can only prove the property.


I am a coachman; I and the other witness had been to Knightsbridge, on the 24th of January; and on my return, between eight and nine o'clock in the morning, I saw the prisoner go into No. 31, Piccadilly, and return with something wrapped up before her, which gave me a suspicion; I then followed her as far as Glass-house-street, where I stopped her; I found a quart pot and a pint pot before her, wrapped up in her clothes, belonging to Mr. Medley, and a quart pot and a pint pot, belonging to the prosecutor, the quart in one pocket, and the pint in another; upon that I took her to St. James's watch-house; I marked the property, and left it there till Monday morning; these are the same pots, (producing them).(They were deposed to by the prosecutor).

Prisoner. I have nothing to say.

GUILTY . (Aged 50.)

Fined 1s. and imprisoned twelve months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before


17th February 1796
Reference Numbert17960217-70
VerdictNot Guilty

Related Material

224. GEORGE CROSSLEY was indicted (with Sir JOHN BRIGGS , Bart. HENRY HOLLAND , and WILLIAM AUSTIN , not in custody), for forging and counterfeiting, and uttering and publishing the same as true, on the 29th of April , a certain paper, purporting to be the last will and testament of Henry Lewis , with intent to defraud Thomas Morgan .

(There were several other Counts charging the like forgery, varying the intentions).(The indictment was stated by Mr. Dauncey).

Mr. Sergeant Adair. May it please your Lordship Gentlemen of the Jury. - It becomes my duty on the part of this prosecution, to state to you the nature of the charge against the prisoner at the bar; and of the evidence by which it is supported, in order that you may be able to direct your attention to the principal points of that evidence, and to do that which will be extremely material to the prisoner, and to public justice, to distinguish the application and bearing of the evidence that will be laid before you; because it will be necessary for me to produce a considerable portion of evidence, which of itself will not criminate the prisoner at the bar; in order to establish a fact, without which, we cannot even begin to make a charge against the prisoner. It is certainly equally necessary to justice, that your minds should be prepared, that no further than that evidence is distinctly brought home to the prisoner, by facts fixed upon himself, or clearly within his knowledge, can any tittle of that evidence affect either the life or character of the prisoner; and no man, I am sure, will be more anxious than myself, not even my learned friends, to whom his defence, against so important a charge, is entrusted, will be more anxious than I shall be to point out that distinction in any evidence that I may offer to the Court, and in the outset to do that which my learned friends are not permitted to do, to caution you myself, to strip your minds of every thing which you may have heard or read respecting the transaction in question. The charge against the prisoner arises from a transaction of great public notoriety, and many things may have passed which are entirely unfounded in truth, and, therefore, from any thing you have heard, or any impressions made upon your mind, well or ill-founded, ought you to suffer, in the flightest degree, to enter your minds, but to wipe off, as far as it is possible for human nature to do, every recollection upon the subject, as if you were perfect strangers to every thing but what you may hear in Court, and from that, form your opinion, whether the charge is so made out, as to justify you in finding a verdict that will affect the life of the unfortunate prisoner at the bar.

Gentlemen, the crime of forgery is one that is destructive of all security of property, and which tears up by the roots, the confidence necessary to be placed in solemn legal instruments; in short, leads to every kind of plunder, and is therefore justly estimated, by the law, the highest order of crimes that can be committed in a state of civilized society, and punished with death. It is the duty of Juries, in all cases to take care in judicial enquiries, not to proceed upon vague grounds of suspicion, and certainly peculiarly so, in cases that affect the life of the party.

Gentlemen, having thus shortly called your attention to the importance of your duty, it becomes necessary to give you as distinct and concise a narrative as possible, of this transaction; I will afterwards point out the more important facts, which apply to the questions you are to try; and give you a general statement of the nature of the evidence by which it is to be supported.

Gentlemen, the will in question purports to be the will of a gentleman of the name of Lewis; and the first question for you to decide will be, whether that is the genuine will of the party or not; because, if upon the evidence in this cause, you should find reason, when you have heard both sides, either to think that this is in fact the will of Mr. Lewis, or to entertain any considerable doubt, whether it is or not, we certainly cannot proceed

one jot further; for no evidence of suspicious circumstances, no evidence of mysterious conduct, nothing that tends to involve the prisoner in general suspicions, can have the smallest effect; if you are doubtful whether this is a genuine instrument, for the prisoner is not in the outset called upon to prove that it is a genuine instrument; God forbid that he should; but we are called upon to prove, in this case, something which partakes of the nature of a negative, but which is, however, an affirmative proposition, capable of proof that it is a forgery. The first point, therefore, for you to consider is, whether this is the genuine will of Mr. Lewis, or whether it is a forgery; which, if we should establish beyond any reasonable ground of doubt, for you are not to expect mathematical demonstration in the proceedings of the administration of justice; but you are not to pronounce him guilty of a forgery, if a reasonable doubt can be entertained, by conscientious men upon their oaths, fairly considering the circumstances of the case. And, gentlemen, if we should make out that proposition, still the prisoner will stand unaffected, unless we bring home a knowledge and participation of the prisoner in the acts of those persons who fabricated the instrument.

Gentlemen, Mr. Lewis, the real or supposed testator, was a clergyman, a gentleman of a liberal education, and of considerable accomplishments; a man respected in the neighbourhood in which he lived, for the character of a man of letters, and for a peculiarity of character, which may not be immaterial for your consideration, in estimating the probability of his having first made any will at all; or, secondly, a will of the kind which is the subject of this indictment; he was, besides being a man of letters, a proud and reserved man; not extremely communicative of his affairs; little disposed to confer with strangers, even upon trisling matters, much less upon matters of importance; and still less with persons of inferior rank, or of doubtful and suspicious characters. Mr. Lewis had been, through a considerable part of his life, involved in a litigation respecting the authenticity of his mother's will; it appears from some of the evidence in the cause, that that circumstance had made a strong impression upon his mind; what the nature of that case was, is totally immaterial; and it would only be wasting your time to allude to, further than to explain some of the declarations of Mr. Lewis himself, which have reference to the subject of this charge; it is sufficient that he had a strong impression of the forgery of his mother's will; and that that circumstance weighed so much in his mind, as, joined with other peculiarities in his character, to produce a determination in him, which appears to have continued to the time of his death, never to make a will himself; but, to use his own expression, to let the law make his will, and dispose of his property: you will find, therefore, that upon several different occasions, and to several different persons, for some time antecedent to Mr. Lewis's death, which happened in the month of January, 1795, he has declared, cost he never meant to make a will, and never would; and sometimes with allusions to the transactions of his mothers' will.

Gentlemen, you will find also, that he had no great esteem or affection for the family of a person named in this indictment, who is not now forthcoming to public justice; a Baronet, of the name of Sir John Briggs , who had married a cousin of Mr. Lewis's; and in whose favour, as to a very considerable portion of Mr. Lewis's effects, the will in question is supposed to have been made; I mean in favour of Lady Briggs, and her posterity, not to Sir John himself; you will find, however, that the unfavourable impression he had received of the character of Sir John Briggs, had induced him to declare, at a period not very distant from his death, and long subsequent to the date of the supposed will, that none of the Briggs' family should have any portion of his property.

This gentleman, so circumstanced, resided at Hygga, in Monmouthshire, a few miles distant from the town of Monmouth; he used to go frequently into Devonshire, partly on account of his health; he returned from thence to his own house, with a fevere indisposition, which terminated in his death, which happened at Monmouth, at the house of a relation, Mrs. Kane, the mother of Lady Briggs, in whose favour the will disposes of one half of his real estates, during her life; notwithstanding that circumstance, I believe you will find no hint was ever dropped by him, that he either had made or intended to make any disposition of his property by will; the universal impression by all his family, that this gentleman had died intestate; notice was given of his death to his different heirs at law, for he possessed several estates, some of which came to him by his father, and some through his mother; to his estates at Monmouth, the present prosecutor, Mr. Morgan, was maternal heir at law; there was no trace of a will found among his papers, nor no suspicion entertained, at that time, that any will was made. In that situation, the parties entered into possession of the different estates, and things remained in that situation from the time of his death, the 11th of January, till the 5th of April following; when a very singular transaction happened; a letter was received by a gentleman of the name of Lewis, at Monmouth, from a person of the name of Isgar, dated Bath, who stated, that the Rev. Mr. Lewis was indebted to him for witnessing his will; and, desiring to know where he might address him, in order to be satisfied for the trouble he had taken upon that occasion. This was a very singular occurrence, both in its nature and the time and circumstances, under which it came forward; and it was a singular sort of charge, for, I believe, it is one of the first instances of a bill brought in (at a distance of so considerable time from the date of the will) for being a witness to a gentleman's will. This extraordinary letter excited a great deal of speculation; and Sir John Briggs thought proper to set out for Bath, to enquire for this person, of the name of Isgar; he went with other persons, to Isgar; he asked him, if he knew any thing of a will of Mr. Lewis's; he replied, that he did; and, what is still more surprising, this man, an obscure man, resident at Bath, at this distance from Mr. Lewis's family, not only was a witness to the will, but had the will in his possession. Isgar produced the will; and, on the 5th of May following, this will was brought by Isgar to Monmouth; delivered to Mrs. Kane, the mother of Lady Briggs, who was appointed one of the executrixes,

Gentlemen, I ought now to state to you, what the will was; it bears date the 10th of August, 1791; near four years before the death of the testator, so that you will find, that most of the declarations of Mr. Lewis, the testator, that he never would make a will, are posterior to the date of the will; that he never had made a will, and never intended to make a will. The will is drawn formally, not with the appearance of having been drawn by a gentleman in Mr. Lewis's situation-a man of letters, a gentleman, and a clergyman; but drawn formally and scientifically; as if it was drawn by a man of the law, as you will find by the provisions.(Reads the will, for which see the evidence).

Gentlemen, the parties claiming under the will brought an ejectment for a moiety of the lands lying in Montgomery, against Mr. Morgan, the maternal heir at law of those estates, which had come to the testator from his mother, and who had entered upon them, upon the presumption, that Mr. Lewis died inteslate; that ejectment was tried at the last Summer assizes, at Hereford; and it becomes necessary to state, that upon the trial of that ejectment, a verdict was found against the authenticity of that will, for the defendant, the heir at law; and, here again, I think it my duty, on the part of the prosecutor, to state to you, that you are far from being bound or concluded by that verdict; that verdict does by no means prove this will a forgery; I will go further, I will say, that as against Mr. Crossly it is no evidence, that it is a forgery, because Mr. Crossly was not a party to that cause; nor appeared as an attorney in it, and therefore it is extremely possible that all the evidence may not have been distinctly laid before that Jury; or if it was, that that Jury may have formed a wrong opinion; you are therefore not bound by that verdict even to believe that this will is a forgery, which is the first thing we have to prove; but it is necessary to state that fact to you, that such a verdict was found. The noble and learned Judge, who tried that cause, thought it his duty, in furtherance of public justice, and in order that a transaction of so soul a nature, if that verdict was right, might be the subject of further investigation in a Court of proper jurisdiction; for it then became the subject of criminal jurisdiction; it was thought proper to detain the will: and Austin and Isgar, the witnesses to that will, were apprehended by warrant, and committed to Hereford Gaol; and while they were so in custody, one of those witnesses, whom I have already mentioned as residing at Bath, in an obscure situation, and of no very good character, thought proper to give intimations that he was ready to make a discovery of, what he alledged to be the whole truth; he purports to be a witness to that will; he therefore must have knowledge as to the question whether it is or not the will of Mr. Lewis; it was thought deserving of attention, and conducive to public justice, to attend to his offer; the Mayor of Hereford, accompanied by some other persons, with Mr. Stoke, the attorney for this prosecution, and attorney for Mr. Morgan, upon the trial of that ejectment, attended; Isgar repeated his offers of disclosure, and, in fact, gave an account before the Mayor of, what he stated to be, the truth, of that transaction. You will see, therefore, that that person, who stands in the light of an accomplice, who has witnessed a will, which he now says was a forgery, who upon the trial swore to the execution of that will, must necessarily for public justice, be brought to-day before you as an evidence: I need not, after giving this description of him, tell you, with how much caution you ought to receive testimony from so soul a quarter; I will even go the length of saying, that that testimony is wholly undeserving of credit, unless it is very materially confirmed by circumstances proved by unsuspected witnesses. Upon this verdict, however, and upon this disclosure of Isgar, other parties were apprehended; Sir John Briggs left the kingdom; that circumstance, however it might affect him, if he was now upon his trial, can have no influence upon your judgment with respect to the prisoner. Mr. Holland, another of the parties, has also withdrawn himself from public justice; Bowden, the other witness, being dead.

Gentlemen, I have thus given you a narrative of the transactions which have led to this prosecution; it will now be necessary more particularly to state to you, the nature of the evidence, by which you will be enabled to form a judgment upon the two questions that will be submitted to your consideration; first, whether you are clearly satisfied that this is not the will of Mr. Lewis, which it purports to be, but is a forgery; and secondly, if it be a forged will, whether you have sufficient proof brought home to the prisoner at the bar, to satisfy you that he was one of the persons concerned, either in the immediate act of the forgery, or in publishing that will, with the knowledge that it was forged.

Gentlemen, that the will is a forgery will be to be collected from the substance of the will itself; from the characters and descriptions of the witnesses that have subseribed it; from the declarations of the testator upon the subject, compared with the will, the date of the will, and certain other evidence in the testator's hand-writing, found in different papers belonging to him, which are pretty strongly applicable to the question, whether the will is or not a genuine will: you will find that this will is made principally in favour of that very family to which the declaration of the testator was applied, long after the date of the will, that they never should have any part of his property; and the authenticity of the will will be still more materially affected by the will itself, which, pursuing the legal form which men of the law are used to, revokes all former wills made by Mr. Lewis, the said testator; from that, you are to infer, in the very teeth of all the declarations that you will hear, that this was not the first will he had made, but that he was in the habit of making wills from time to time; that it was necessary to revoke all former wills; and that applied to a person who repeatedly declared, subsequent to the date of the will, that he had never made a will at all.

Gentlemen, you observe the will bears date the 10th of August, 1791, that it purports to be witnessed and executed at Bath; and in point of fact you will learn, if it is necessary, from the noble and learned Judge, who tried the ejectment, that the witnesses swore to the eexcution of it at Bath; and they are, I believe, all of them, residents at Bath; now it will be pretty clearly, and unquestionably proved to you, that on the 10th of August, when this will bears date, Mr. Lewis was at home at Hygga in the county of Monmouth, and it will be prov

ed to you, by something more positive than vague recollection, by accounts of transactions at Hygga in his own writing, of things brought in, and payments made by him to different persons distinctly and regularly from a day prior to the 8th of August, down to the 12th of the same month, and afterwards to the 20th; but, from the 20th to the 27th of the same month, there is no entry made by Mr. Lewis in that book; the possible conclusion at least from which is, that he might have been absent from Hygga at any time, or the whole time, between the 20th and 27th of August. Mr. Lewis having been at home at the time the will bears date, proved clearly that the will could not have been executed by him at Bath; and this being more generally talked of than the prudence and reserve that ought to have been used, would admit, it became pretty well known that there would be strong evidence against this will, if that will was attempted to be applied to the day of its date, it appearing therefore, that that could not be the true date, and that unless the will was antedated, it could not be the will of Mr. Lewis; it is pretty remarkable, that afterwards, upon the proof of the will, the witnesses admitted that the will was antedated, and fixed the time of the execution in that very period in which the blank in this memorandum-book occurred, and a very lame apology indeed was made for antedating it; the reason given, was, that the draft of the will was left blank, and that it was filled up with the word tenth, because there was not room to write a longer word in the blank. Now, when you come to find, that this account was not given till after it was known, that the will could not have been executed on that day, that will be a circumstance of very strong suspicion indeed.

Gentlemen, from these circumstances, therefore, there seems to be strong evidence, that that was not the will of Mr. Lewis, and having laid that foundation of probability, I will add direct and positive testimony, by persons long and well acquainted with the character of his hand-writing, and who, I am told, will be extremely clear upon that point, that this is not his hand-writing. Gentlemen, besides this, you will find a very strong body of evidence, extrinsic of the will, to shew that a will was intended to be forged, and was actually forged for Mr. Lewis; you will find a meeting held with Sir John Briggs , the person interested in the will, on the very evening preceding the burial of Mr. Lewis, in which the possibility of supplying the want of a will was much agitated by the parties at that time, and even under the then circumstances, was agreed upon by the parties, a conversation took place, which necessarily led to, and indicated, the plan of forging a will; two of the parties present, were Sir John Briggs , who has left the country, Mr. Holland, who has also left the country, and both of whom are implicated in this indictment. Gentlemen, in furtherance of that you will find, that when Mr. Holland's house was searched, several very material papers were found, which will be applicable to the two different heads of evidence that I have stated to you; at present, I shall confine myself to the general proof, that that will was a forgery, for that Mr. Holland was concerned at least in that forgery, does not at all affect the prisoner; but at Holland's there was found a paper, purporting to be the will of Mr. Lewis, which makes dispositions of the property of Mr. Henry Lewis , similar to those contained in the will, that is now contended to be his genuine will, similar exactly in the principal demises of the estate, the legacies somewhat differ in their amount, but are to the same persons, and in short there seems to be little doubt, that with the alterations which it would occur to a man of business, to make in this instrument, this paper was the prototype of the will now produced as the genuine will of Mr. Lewis; but that will is so ignorantly drawn, so illiterally expressed, so full of mispelling, in short, upon the face of it, so impossible to be the will of Mr. Henry Lewis, a gentleman and a clergyman of learning and education, that the moment it was read over by a man of sense, or a man of business, the observation which you will find afterwards was in fact made, must occur-this will not do, this can never pass as the will of Mr. Henry Lewis, but there is to that draft a signature of Henry Lewis, much more like his writing, than the will in question; but that is not all, for that paper contains absolute demonstration, that some persons were attempting to forge a will for Mr. Lewis, for it appears most distinctly, that when that draft was rejected as impossible to pass for the true will of Mr. Lewis, persons have been practising upon that sheet of paper, for you will find the name of Henry Lewis written over twelve or thirteen different times, sometimes Henry Lewis, sometimes Lewis only, and sometimes Henry only; in short, to imitate the handwriting of the testator, as will be proved by this paper.

Why then, Gentlemen, that naturally leads me to the principal evidence in the cause, I mean the evidence Isgar, the accomplice; you cannot expect that many witnesses can give precise and positive testimony to an act of forgery, it will never be committed in the presence of any person who is not implicated in the guilt; it seems to me, therefore, that it can rarely, if ever, by any thing but accident, occur, that a Court, or Jury, can have direct evidence of the fact of forgery from what may be fairly called a credible witness; and in this case, the only direct evidence will be that of an accomplice; and, of an accomplice, I will fairly state to you, as little deserving of credit in himself, as any accomplice that can be called into a Court of Justice; because, he not only comes to tell you, that for hire and reward he became a subscribing witness to a forged will, but afterwards, that he came into a Court of Justice, by perjury, to support that forgery, stating himself to be present at the execution of that will by Mr. Lewis, which, he now says, never was executed at all; therefore, you will certainly not feel yourselves called upon to believe any thing that Isgar says, merely because he says it; or because he says it upon oath. I will now read to you the account Isgar has already given, and will, probably, again give of this transaction. Isgar states, first, a conversation which passed in London, in the month of February, with a person of the name of Clarke, an attorney, in Nottinghamshire, who will make a considerable figure in this transaction; and another person, respecting the writing of a will upon a blank sheet of paper, upon which the persons name should be subseribed. Holland was also present, and a reward was promised, at that time, to Isgar; and, he admits himself, from the pressure of distressed circumstances, to have assented to this wicked

plan, and agreed to lend his assistance. He then states, that Holland, in the month of March, brought to his house, at Bath, a draft of a will, purporting to be the will of Henry Lewis; and that this was after the death of Mr. Lewis, that he produced a sheet of paper with the name Henry Lewis written upon it; he says, Holland, at that time, told him, that the paper was old enough; you see the meaning of that; that the will purporting to bear date four years before the testator's death, if the paper had been made a few weeks before, it would have furnished a means of detection. He admits that he himself copied that will upon the piece of paper so prepared he says, he sent it by the post, with a direction that he received from Holland; that Sir John Briggs called upon him with the will which he had so sent, and said, that that will would not do, for that the testator was a very particular man, and certainly would not have signed such a will as that. Sir John took it away, and, afterwards, Holland called again with the same copy, and asked if he could find a witness who could make good marks; upon which, he says, he soon after saw William Austin, the other witness to the will in question, and told him, that he knew how to put him, Austin, in the way of getting 100l. that he told him it was to put his name to a will; and Austin said, that he would do it; he says then, that Holland, Austin, and himself, went to a public-house in Bath, where Holland produced the will so copied; and Holland himself then went through the form of publishing that as the will, and then gave Austin a note for 100l. for value received, payable at Nando's coffee-house; he says, that for some time afterwards, and in his original account, given before the Mayor of Hereford, it appears, that the first time he saw Sir John Briggs was the first of May; that must be, and is, a mistake as to the time; you will give that circumstance as much weight as you may think it deserves; but in point of fact, if the transaction is true, it must have been in the month of March; Sir John Briggs said, that will will not do, we must have it done another way; and then said, that fellow Holland brought me one George Crossley , and asked the witness if he knew Crossley; the witness answered that he did; and that Sir John Briggs then said, he believed Holland had let him in, and would be his ruin; it is certain that Holland had managed this in a very bungling way up to this time; he asked the witness if he would go to London to Crossley, and if Austin would go with him; he says, that Austin and he consented; and here it will appear clear to you, that the month must have been a mistake, and probably not an intentional mistake on the part of the witness, because you will find, that Austin and he did, in fact, go to London together, about the 25th, or 26th, of March. He states that they were sent by Sir John Briggs , to attend Mr. Crossley, at the Golden-cross, Charing-cross; he then says, he afterwards heard conversation with Sir John at Mr. Crossley's house, he being with Austin in an adjoining room; George Crossley brought out to him and Austin two copies of the will of Henry Lewis, which appeared to have the name of Henry Lewis, together with the dates, all ready subscribed and filled up, but without any witnesses' name; and he told the witness and Austin to set their names as witnesses to the will. He says Austin wrote his own name, and then the name of Thomas Bowden , who had been dead about six monthes before; and then he says, that he himself wrote his name to both the copies; he says, Mr. Crossley held the door in his hard during that time, and made use of some particular expressions which you will hear from the witness. He says, after drinking some wine, he and Austin went away. A day or two after this, he says, he saw George Crossley , and asked him why two should be signed? George Crossley said, in case any accident should happen to one, that he and his clerks might then come forward, and say, it was left by the old gentlemen in his hands; that he took one of them with him, and the other was left with Mr. Crossley, who told him, that he had taken care to see that the paper was old enough for such purposes. He says, Mr. Crossley dictated a letter for him to write to Mr. Morgan, at Monmouth, which he accordingly did. He says, that he was to receive 500l. for his share; and that he did receive a bill, of Holland, for 50l. at two month's date, which he paid to George Crossley , being indebted to him for some business that he had done for him. He says, Mr. Crossley having received a sum from Holland, further paid him the sum of 10l. and he also believes, that the two wills were written by one Upfell, a nephew, and one of the clerks of the prisoner at the bar.

Gentlemen, I have now gone through the account of this nefarious transaction, by a party confessing himself to be an accomplice. Gentlemen, from the difficulty of bringing forth transactions that in their nature shun the light; the wisdom of the law does not wholly reject the restimony of accomplices, but directs Juries to receive it with great caution; unquestionably, because a man who comes into Court to impute to himself a degree of guilt equal to that of the prisoner at the bar, is not entitled to the same belief as what the law calls a fair and credible witness; but it would be perfect nonsense if the law admitted such evidence to be examined, and at the same time said, that when he is examined, you shall in no case be permitted to believe it; that would be an absurdity, which cannot be imputed to the laws of this country. The law therefore takes the middle line, which is the line of justice and common sense; it says, we will hear what a man has to say, who even stands (to make use of that vulgar expression) in that blasted situation that I have described; but we will hear him with caution; we will attend very minutely to the circumstances of the story that he tells; we will judge of its probability; but we will go further, we will examine whether he is so confirmed by written evidence, or by facts proved by credible witnesses, as to satisfy the Jury, that though the story is told by a person who himself is not worthy of belief, is nevertheless a true story.

Now, Gentlemen, I have endeavoured fairly to state the point of view in which you are to consider the evidence that is to be given by Isgar, and it now becomes my duty to state to you, what the circumstances are, by which this evidence of Isgar is to be consumed. Then, Gentlemen, the first material thing that Isgar states is, that Richard Holland brought him the draft of a will prepared, and he states Sir John Briggs subsequent application; now that will be confirmed in the most clear and satisfactory manner, by the fabricated draft, upon

which I have already observed; with that number of names to it, found in Holland's house; that therefore Holland was possessed of a paper, as described by Isgar, is certainly true; for that is proved beyond a possibility of doubt. Another very particular circumstance that confirms it is, that this very paper is in the hand-writing of Isgar, who says he wrote it. Another very remarkable thing is, Holland saying to him, that the paper was old enough; now you will find, that in a letter found at Crossley's house, from Clarke, couched in very mysterious terms, which indicated pretty strongly, that they were engaged in some nesarious transactions together, and which concludes with this remarkable expression,"I have some very choice paper forty years old:" so said Clarke to Crossley, on the 6th of March, 1795. The other parts of the letter are so unintelligible, that I have not ingenuity enough to apply them to this or any other transaction. Gentlemen, when you find that, and also the other correspondence that will be produced to you, between Clarke, Crossley, and Holland, writing to one another in this enigmatical manner, will confirm that part of the testimony of Isgar.

The next point in which Isgar's testimony is confirmed will be this, that after Austin had subscribed his name to the paper produced by Holland, and had agreed to become a witness, Holland gave Austin a note for 100l. payable at Nando's coffee-house, for value received. I will give you unquestionable proof that that part at least of Isgar's testimony is true, because that when Austin was apprehended at Hereford, that very note was found in Austin's hat. That note is antedated; for it is stated by Isgar to be in March, 1795; and the note is dated the 12th of December, 1794; and when that note is produced, you shall have the examination of it; you shall hold it up to the light, and you will see very clearly, that though it bears date upon the face of it on the 12th of December, 1794, the note was written some time in 1795; because you will see that the figure 4 is written over a 5; that therefore must have been written in 1795: it was delivered to Austin in March 1795; the 12th of December, 1794, therefore, could not have been the date of it. That part of Isgar's testimony, therefore, is true beyond all doubt.

The next confirmation of Isgar is this, that in April he and Austin came up, at the desire of Sir John Briggs , to London, to meet Crossley, where the forgery was committed. Now I shall prove that Austin and he appeared in London together about that time; that will be proved by the person with whom Isgar lodged, in St. Martin's-lane; and by the sister of Austin, who will prove that Austin was in town at that time; and the person with whom Isgar lodged will prove that Austin came to him while he was there: that is another confirmation of Isgar's evidence. His connexion with Crossley will also be proved; from some very material circumstances it will appear to you, that Crossley was seen with these men, by credible witnesses; and the witness says, that Mr. Crossley made use of the same expression to him that Holland had before done, in telling the witness that he had taken care in seeing that the paper was old enough for these purposes; there it is only necessary to remind you again of Clarke's letter to Crossley, stating, that he had got choice paper forty years old. He says then, that Mr. Crossley dictated the letter he wrote to Monmouth, respecting the will; that may or not be true; it is no further confirmed than shewing that they were together; but that such a letter was received is certain, for it bears date upon the 5th of April, and being antedated, it was not received till a period late enough to be written after the time he met. Crossley in London; it was not actually received, I believe, till the latter end of April, some days after Isgar had been in town, and had been seen with Mr. Crossley. Then Isgar states, that he was to have 500l.; that he received a bill of 501. which he paid to Crossley, and 10l.; in that you will find him confirmed by a letter of Crossley's, on the 2d of May, to Holland; in which he states that fact; and in another letter of the 2d of June to Holland, he says, "I have now advanced 70l. 10s."60l. on account of his bill for the goods, in which"your 50l. is included." So that it is a proof that Mr. Crossley paid 10l. and this bill for 50l. makes exactly the 60l.; in which Mr. Crossley himself states, the bill is included."The ten guineas is paid by order of"Monsieur." We cannot say who that was; it was likely to be Sir John Briggs ; but we can only guess. Then, he says, "however let me have the 70l. 10s. by" return of post, and it may be best to let him have 40l."more, as he so much presses; but of this do as you"please; I told him, you ought not to pay for the"goods till the sale money was paid to you." Now these are circumstances which do pretty strongly confirm the testimony of Isgar. There is also in this letter of the 2d of May, very strong matter of crimination against the prisoner; for you will find him giving a false account of some transactions, in which he was then concerned; in that letter you will find the prisoner had the andacity to make use of the name of that very respectable gentleman who at this moment attends here, I mean Sir John Scott , his Majesty's Attorney General, from whose-well known character, I am sure, if you had not been sitting where you are, bound to decide, by evidence, upon oath alone, you would not have required witnesses to state that it was not true, that it applied to Sir John Scott; if there is any other Sir John Scott to whom it does apply, it will be incumbent upon Mr. Crossley to shew which, if he can, I shall be extremely happy; but writing to Mr. Richard Holland upon the 2d of May, Mr. Crossley says,"When I saw Sir John Scott here, he then advised,"and it was agreed, that Mr. Eberno should be at the"King's-head, upon Monday at eleven. I have since"then settled the matter of Eberno, which Mrs. Allen"last wrote about, and the bail was put in, so that"nothing can, but his own want of prudence, prevent"his attending to the appointment; he set off by the"coach at four this morning." Now that part of the letter leads into a very extraordinary transaction indeed, and I believe I may venture to prophesy, that Sir John Scott will tell you he never gave such advice, and that he has not any knowledge who this Mr. Eberno is; it is necessary, however, that you should know who he is, and I think I can prove that Mr. Eberno is no other than Isgar, the witness; I will shew you that Isgar, who will swear to the forgery at the time I have stated, staid in town after that, till the 2d of May, which is the date of

this letter, that he did set out from town at or about four o'clock on that morning; and I will prove, that on the preceding day, bail was put in for Isgar, by a Mr. Stephen Price , and paid for by Mr. Crossley, which I will prove by a book found at Crossley's, and that Crossley gave to Isgar two guineas, with three guineas and a half which he states was given to him before. I will shew you that Isgar left town that morning at four, as Eberno is stated to have done, and that no bail was put in for any person of the name of Eberno. You will also find that Eberno was to be at the King's-head on Monday, and that Crossley writes to Holland, and expresses great uneasiness at not hearing of Isgar's arrival; it will apear that Isgar was not at the King's-head, as Eberno was expected to be, but was prevented, as he says, for want of money; he goes, in fact, to Bath, and from Bath to Monmouth, but not till late on Tuesday the 5th, when he carried the will in question; and Mr. Crossley afterwards had advice from Mr. Clarke of the arrival of Isgar at Monmouth, upon which you will find he sets his mind at rest, which it was not till then, owing to the non-arrival of Eberno at the King's-head on the 4th. He says, "I hope Sir" John Scott will not fail to meet him," (that is, to meet Mr. Eberno at Monmouth; I believe I hardly need call the Attorney-General to prove that he did not meet Mr. Eberno at Monmouth); "that he may at"once dispatch his business; for he is much too apt to"get drunk; the sooner he returns the better; for I"cannot answer for his prudence, if in liquor; and"when any thing pleases or displeases Mr. Eberno, he"is generally drunk on the subject; I am well satisfied"you may trust him, as he will faithfully bring the"money to account;" for you will find that he did bring the money,

"so you not fear him on that"head; but a man that gets drunk is not a fit person"for business, and therefore I would have you to act"more cautiously in future; the 50l. you gave him last"is accepted." I shall shew you an entry in Crossley's book, of the receipt of the 50l. on the account of Holland, described to be payable in two months.

"I told"him where he was to get the money, and he had it, the"full 50l. Sir John Scott told me to advance him five"guineas more, which I did; you might as well request"the payment of that five guineas, as it is best to keep"no account but what is clear." The conclusion of the letter says, "I hope Mr. Eberno will not be kept an"hour at the King's-head, as I have given him orders to"depart as soon as possible." So that as soon as Isgar had done his business, that is, carried the will, he wished him to get away as fast as possible, and I believe, when you are satisfied that Eberno means Isgar, you will have as little doubt that Sir John Scott means Sir John Briggs, as that Eberno means Isgar.

Gentlemen, Isgar gives an account also of a meeting held near Bath. You will find him confirmed in that, first, by positive testimony, that he and Austin did go to such a meeting, and I think, in the beginning of April; you will find at Bath, brought together upon the scene of action, Isgar, Austin, Holland, Sir John Briggs , and Mr. Crossley, the prisoner at the bar you will have Mr. Crossley proved to be at Bath at that time, by a person who asked him how he came there, and he shewed his anxiety that it should not be known that he was there, declaring, that he would not, for 1000l. that it should be known; and I will prove Isgar and Austin going together on horseback to a public-house on the Bristol road, four miles from Bath, and meeting with Sir John Briggs and Mr. Crossley; after that, Mr. Crossley returned to London, and you will probably find that the forgery was there planned, which was afterwards executed at Mr. Crossley's house.

Gentlemen, another circumstance will strongly confirm the account given by Isgar; he tells you the way in which he received the 60l. he says, Mr. Crossley gave him change out of it; he says, that Mr. Crossley gave him two Abergavenay bank-notes for five guineas each; I will prove that two such notes were seen in the hands of Isgar at that time; he tells you further, that Mr. Crossley paid him that 10l. by a draft upon his bankers, Morland, Hammersley, and Co. in Pall-mall; I will prove by the clerks of that house, that that draft was received by a man of the name of Isgar, so that in many points his story is confirmed, and in many points that connect him with the prisoner at the bar.

Gentlemen, there is, besides that, a letter found in Mr. Crossley's possession, from Clarke, manifesting some intelligence he had received from Mr. Crossley, by means of a person of the name of Vincent, who is referred to in some other of the letters, in which he says, on the 13th of September, 1705, (a letter found at Crossley's, after Holland's house was searched);

"I"have received your's, and am sorry Dixon's sample"is found; what a fool must he be to write so many"names as you say he hath done." Now I will prove Dixon to be a name by which Holland was known; and when I produce the draft of the will, with so many names subcribed to it, it is impossible to doubt that this will is a forgery, and that this letter had reference to it. He says, "What a fool must he be to write so many names,"as you say he hath done; you may be certain it is all"his own doing; I have had no letter. - Vincent called"here while I was with you; he said, he should call"again before he went back into the West, and from"him I shall have the whole history."

Now, gentlemen, these circumstances confirm very strongly the testimony of this witness, in points directly connected with the prisoner at the bar. - And, Gentlemen, at the time Mr. Crossley was apprehended at his house, in the Adelphi, the first paper that appeared lying upon his desk, was the blank cover of a letter, having the Hereford post-mark upon it; and being of a date referrable to this transaction, it suggested itself instantly, that some light might be thrown upon the transaction by this letter; Mr. Crossley went to his private drawer, but upon being asked respecting that cover, he he denied having any knowledge of the letter from which that cover was torn; he supposed it was something that had been destroyed by some of his clerks; upon opening the private drawer; there were two particular papers, upon which Mr. Crossley made this observation, I suppose this is what you want. - Now you shall hear what that was which Mr. Crossley supposed they wanted; you will find it was the half sheet torn off the cover I have already described to you, and as that will be matter

of eye-sight, I shall say but little to you upon the subject; if you place them together, it will appear that the waterlines in the paper correspond, and the water-merk is torn in the middle; you will therefore be convinced, that that is the letter which belonged to that cover; it is a letter from. Hereford, written by Austin to Crossley; the evidence of it, as against Mr. Crossley, is, its being found in his possession, under the circumstances I have stated; it is a letter complaining of the hardships they had suffered in jail, Isgar and Austin being then in jail; upon this charge, Isgar not having at that time made any discovery; it is dated the 29th of September,

"I"shall be glad of your answer as soon as possible, to"know what we are to do, &c." (See the Evidence). Now this letter from Austin is found in a private drawer at Crossley's; it is first denied by him, and then he said, this is, I suppose, what you want. This is a very strong circumstance, which seems to have nothing particular in it, except from the story of Isgar; and is a very essential paper to implicate Mr. Crossley in the transaction.

Gentlemen, I beg pardon for having taken up so unreasonable a portion of your time; I have endeavoured to point out, as clearly as I could, the circumstances brought home to the prisoner at the bar, by which the evidence of Isgar will be confirmed; and the greater part of those circumstances are by written evidence, proceeding very much from the prisoner himself, or found in his possession; if therefore the evidence of a person, totally discredited as to his own veracity, can meet with belief in a Court of Jutice, and if it cannot, I know no purpose for which the law receives it; the circumstances of confirmation do appear to entitle this evidence to be received at least, with much attention, and well weighed by the Jury. It is not my duty to press it further upon your minds, you will judge for yourselves; assisted by the directions you will receive from the learned Judge on the beneh, whether applying the whole of those circumstances that fairly do apply to the evidence of Isgar, weighing on the one hand the character of the witness, and on the other the material circumstances in which he is confirmed, you will pronounce your judgment whether you believe that evidence or not.

Gentlemen, I shall call the evidence on the part of the prosecution, again asking pardon for having trespassed so much upon your time, in the sincere hope that the evidence may not come up to my statement; no man will be better satisfied, if, upon a full and fair examination of all the circumstances, you should feel yourselves authorized (in point of conscience, and with attention to your duty, and the oath you have taken) to acquit the prisoner at the bar, than I shall be; but if you should entertain no rational doubt, and your minds are clearly satisfied(as in a case of this nature you ought to be) of these two propositions - that the will is a forgery, and under the knowledge of the prisoner; then it is a duty you owe the public, to bring to justice the perpetrators of so foul a transaction as this.

Evidence for the Prosecutrix.


Produces the will.

Mr. Fielding. Q. From whom did you receive that? - A. It was read by me, given in evidence in Court, and I was ordered by the Court to take possession of it.

Q. From whose hand did you receive it? - A. I believe Lord Kenyon's; I am not certain.

Q. Further than from the belief that his Lordship delivered it to you, you don't know from whom you received it? - A. No.

Q. You won't affect to be positive that the noble Lord delivered it to you? - A. No; I will not.

Mr. Fielding. Q. As to whether that instrument was read in the cause or not, that of course you can only speak to from memory of the supposed contents? - A. I marked it at the time, and have had it ever since.

Q. Be so good as to tell my Lord and the Jury the title of the cause? - A. Doe on the demise of Kane and others, against Morgan, Esq.


Examined by Mr. Mils. I am an attorney, at Monmouth; I was acquainted with Mr. Lewis till the day of his death.

Q. For what length of time? - A. For about eleven years.

Q. During that time, were you employed by him to transact any business; or were you acquainted with his house? - A. For upwards of seven years I was attorney for him in several causes.

Q. What was Mr. Lewis? - A. A clergyman.

Q. What fortune had he? - A. I believe he had estates, freehold and copyhold, to the amount of 800l. a year.

Q. Had he any personal estate? - A. Very trisling.

Q. Do you know his habits of life? - A. Yes.

Q. What were they; with whom did he associate? - A. With Mrs. Kane and me; at Sidmouth and Monmouth he passed most of his time.

Q. Did he live with persons of his rank, or persons of inferior rank? - A. With persons of his own rank.

Q. I believe he was a scholar? - A. Yes.

Q. How nearly was Mrs. Kane related to him? - A. I believe they called one another cousins; but I don't know whether they were so related.

Q. Have you often seen him write? - A. Many times.

Q.Have you seen him write his name often? - A. Very often.

Q. Look at that signature and say what you believe of it? - A. I have examined it frequently, and my opinion upon my oath is, that it is not Mr. Lewis's hand writing.

Q. State any thing you see particular in that hand-writing that makes you think so? - A. It is wrote more formal, not with that degree of freedom and case with which Mr. Lewis generally

wrote; from the observation I have made upon it, it appears to me as if some part of the pen had went over after some of the letters were formed.

Q. From your knowledge of his hand-writing, and your observation upon that, what is your opinion? - A. That it is not the hand-writing of Mr. Lewis.

Q. Did you, in the course of your acquaintance with Mr. Lewis, hear him at any time, and when did you first hear him, speak about his will? - A. In 1789, I was concerned in Iitigating a cause for him about his mother's will; I was in London with him.

Mr. Erskine. My Lord, we humbly conceive, that this can be no evidence; it is most truly, most distinctly, and most honourably stated by my learned friend, who has just now opened the case for the prosecution, that it cannot be, unless this will is brought home to the prisoner. My Lord, if we were in a civil cause here between persons, litigating this property, connected with this family, and capable of course from that connexion of applying for evidence to counteract evidence of the description that is now given; I understand the objection was not taken before the noble and learned Lord who tried the cause, but supposing it was taken; if it was admissible there, it is not admissible here: Mr. Crossley stands (a mere stranger to the deceased), charged with a crime, and therefore, if the authenticity of the will is first to be settled or destroyed, and if Mr. Crossley cannot be affected till that authenticity is destroyed, the authenticity ought not to be effected by the evidence now offered before your Lordship; because having no concern with this testator, undoubtedly he has not the opportunity of answering it.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, the evidence, now offered, is, declarations of the testator, of two sorts; with respect to his being testate or intestate, and with respect to his intention, whether he should die without a will or not; and to be sure there are many persons, very honourable persons, have, during their life-time, stated such declarations, that they have made no will, when it has turned out afterwards that they have made one; I speak from my own experience; declarations of this kind are frequently made, when the persons themselves have actually made a will; and therefore I conceive it to be extremely dangerous to admit this upon the first branch of the cause; the question, whether this be or not Mr. Lewis's will, I submit, is not evidence; it is impossible to enlarge upon it, it is a simple question.

Mr. Fielding. My Lord, I think I am merely to consider it from the situation in which Mr. Crossley stands; Mr. Crossley, being here in this situation, has a right to object to any part of the testimony, however it may appear to the Court, only to be matter of form or not; he having a right to object to that testimony, so he offers his objections to your Lordship; now, my Lord, a declaration made by this gentleman, he not now being living, there is no posible way in the world in which that declaration, as I conceive, in a criminal cause, could be produced here. My Lord, if he had made that declaration in articulo mortis, it could not have been produced; no situation could have been given to render that declaration available, and indeed it passes as a mere hearsay, not applicable to the case, but only applicable to that first part of the case, which the learned Sergeant has acknowledged he must establish, before he can go to the immediate corpus delecti here, but having a reference by possibility; here the prisoner calls upon your Lordship to pause before you receive it, and before it is received, I take it for granted, that your Lordship would expect from the gentlemen on the other side, to say under what sanction this declaration would be made evidence in a Court of Justice; that it has a bearing upon the first part of the case, which we, as counsel for the prisoner, are bound in duty to take; it appears to me, without troubling your Lordship further, that it is impossible in the nature of things, that any thing that gentleman has said, in the course of his life, under any sanction whatever, could be made evidence in a Court of Justice, in a case where the prisoner is trying for his life.

Mr. Justice Rooke. My brother Adair stated, in the opening, very properly, two points to consider, whether it is a forged will or not; and whether it was forged by Mr. Crossley. As to the first, if Mr. Crossley had nothing to do with it, it is of no consequence whether it is a forged will or not; but it is incumbent upon the prosecutor to make out that this is a forged will; I think it is evidence subject for the observation of the Jury; his declarations are, in my opinion, evidences.

Mr. Russell. Q. State the declarations you have heard him make respecting a will? - A. I was in London with him in 1789; I was then concerned for him respecting litigating his mother's will; he lodged at Peele's coffee-house, in Fleet-street; and there, in the act of writing a letter, fell down in a sit; I thought it a very proper opportunity to remind him of the unsettled state of his own affairs; he told me then, he had not made a will; he never would make a will; the law should make his will; in the year 1791, I received a letter from a Mrs. Harman, of Bristol, who was the heir at law of Mr. Lewis, and in very distressed circumstances.

Court. Do not tell us the contents of that letter. - A. I made an application to Mr. Lewis, to relieve her necessities; this he refused, on account of his own pecuniary embarrassments; saying, that she must wait till he was dead, then she would have all; she being his heir at law.

Q. That is the person, I believe, who is now claimant? - A. It is upon the paternal side; he had frequently told me, that she was his heir at law; in the month of October, 1793, I received a letter from a Mr. Jacobs, of Bristol against Mr. Lewis, desiring to have him arrested; Mr. Lewis and I had a little shyness in consequence of it; I thought it my duty to send for him; I informed him of the circumstance of having a writ against him: on the 22d of October he was at my house, for the purpose of putting in bail to that writ; I joined in a bail-bond with him.

Court. We don't want all those circumstances. - A. I am coming to it; he then told me that he had never made a will; he never would make a will; and that the law should make his will; this I am positive was on the 22d of October; I don't confine myself to these three times only, he has many times told me so; but I don't fix my memory as to the times.

Q. Did you ever hear him make any contrary declarations? - A. Never; they were constant and uniform.

Q. When did Mr. Lewis die? - A. The 11th of January, 1795, and was buried on the 16th of the same.

Q. How long before any mention was made, or any report made of a will? - A. I heard of a letter being sent to Monmouth the latter end of April.

Q. Mrs. Kane lived at Monmouth? - A. Yes.

Q. Where did he die? - A. At Mr. Kane's house.

Q. I believe you have some papers here? - A. I have.

Q. Produce those you had from Mr. Phillips first? - A. All but one, which I had from the officer that searched the house, James Francis Lewis .

Q. You had better mark them? - A. These papers I found in Mr. Crossley's house, (ties them together and marks them).

Q. When did you go to Mr. Crossley's house? - A. On the 7th day of October last, I went with a search warrant, backed by one of the officers at Bow-street; and a warrant to apprehend Mr. Crossley at the same time; Sayer, an officer, went with me; I found these papers I now hold in my hand, and a cover of a letter, on Mr. Crossley's desk.

Court. Q. Did you come upon him by surprise? - A. Yes; he did not resist any thing; I asked Mr. Crossley for the contents of that cover; I saw the Hereford post mark upon it; and that made me so pressing for the contents of it; he made me some kind of an evasive answer, either that they were destroyed, or he knew nothing of them; we then proceeded to our search, and I permitted Mr. Crossley to take his papers out of his private drawer; the key of which he had: and I observed that he kept under his left hand two small papers; and appeared anxious to conceal them; I told him, he must let me have them; and then he gave them to me, saying, I suppose this is what you want; and he then gave me the two papers I now hold in my hand.

Court. Q. Did he point to one of them particularly? - A. No; he did not; he gave them me both at the same time.

Q. Did you say any thing to him upon the letters appearing to be signed by the name of Clarke? - A. Yes; he told me it was Mr. Clark of Worksop; I then took the papers away; there were some books also.

Q. Where did you get those papers from? - A. Millar, the officer, gave them to me; I made him mark them; and they have never been out of my possession; these books have been out of my possession some time: upon Mr. Crossley going to Hereford, he wished to have access to these books; I gave them to Mr. Barrow, the Mayor of Hereford, on the 10th of October; I think that was the day that Mr. Crossley was committed; I did not take the books from Mr. Crossley's house; Sayer, the officer took them; he has marked them, and I marked them also.

Court. Q. They were found at Mr. Crossley's, and you have them here? - A. Yes; I received them from Mr. Barrow, in December last; since which they have not been out of my custody.

Q. I believe you have the register of Bowden's death, the other witness to the will? - A. I have,(produces it).

Q. Have you examined this? - A. I have.

Q. Is it an exact copy? - A. It is; from the parish of Bethwick, in the county of Somerset; he was buried the 10th of November, 1794, (the witness produces a copy from the bail-book, of the bail put in for Isgar upon the 1st of May, 1795).

Q. Did you search for any bail put in by Isgar? - A. I have searched in the Crown office for the whole of Hilary term, 1795, and Easter; there is no recognizance in the name of Eberno: I made the same search at the Prothonotary's of the Court of Common Pleas; afterwards at the Three Secondaries of the Court of Common Pleas; afterwards at the Four Judges Chambers; the Court of King's Bench; Exchequer office; Lincoln's Ian; I searched through every office, and could find no such thing: this is an office copy of the record of the judgment in the cause of Doe, on the demise of Kane and others, against Morgan, (producing it).

Mr. Mills. Q. I believe you were present, or applied to by Isgar, before he was admitted to bail? - A. Yes.

Mr. Garrow. You cannot, in this stage, go into that, (produces the attachment upon which the bail was put in).

Th Rev. Mr. WILLIAM JENKINS sworn.

Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. Where do you live? - A. At Sidmouth, in Devonshire.

Q. Were you acquainted with Mr. Henry Lewis of Monmouthshire? - A. I was acquainted with him more than twenty years.

Q. Did he spend much of his time at Sidmouth? - A. The latter part of his time; he left Sidmouth a few days before Christmas-day, 1794.

Q. How long had he been there at that visit? - A. I suppose he had, to and fro, for two or three months.

Q.During that last visit, had you frequent opportunities of seeing and conversing with him? - A. Almost every day.

Q. Did it happen that any part of the family of Sir John Briggs were near Sidmouth at that time? - A. Yes; his eldest son was near Sidmouth with the militia, and sometimes at Sidmouth.

Q. Had you any conversation with Mr. Lewis upon the subject of the family of the Briggs's, and particularly respecting his will? - A. The conversation I had was, I used to ask Mr Lewis about Sir John Briggs; he said, he knew little or nothing about Sir John, and he should not concern himself about it.

Q. Had you any conversation with him about this son? - A. I had; I told Mr. Lewis that Sir John's son would probably be at my house with the other officers of the militia, and asked him to come and spend the evening there; he told me, as Sir John's son was there, he should not come; I said, if he was displeased with Sir John, why with his son; that as he had some property to leave, he said, he should never give any thing, directly or indirectly, to Sir John, or any part of his family.

Q. Did you ever hear him say whether he had or not made a will? - A. I never heard him say it.

Q. You have frequently seen him write. - A. Yes

Q. Have you frequently seen him write his name? - A. Frequently.

Q. Be so good as look at that will, and see if you believe that to be the hand-writing of Mr. Lewis? - A. I do not think it is.

Q. In what does it appear to you to differ? - A. Mr. Lewis would take his pen from the end of the n, before he made the r; and frequently be a break off between the n and the r.

Q.Upon the whole, do you believe that or not to be his hand-writing? - A. I believe it is not his hand-writing.


Q. You were attorney in the cause tried at Hereford, between Mrs. Kane and Mr. Morgan? - A. Yes; for the defendant.

Q.Were you at London at the time of the death of Mr. Lewis? - A. Yes; he died at the house of Mrs. Kane.

Q. Were you acquainted before that time with Mrs. Kane? - A. Yes; intimately and confidentially.

Q. Were you called in upon the death of Mr. Lewis? - A. I was; in consequence of a note that I received, I went to Mrs. Kane's.

Q. Did you make any searches when you were there? - A. Yes; I searched the pocket-book of Mr. Lewis, and the other papers brought to me.

Court. Q. What day was this? - A. The 11th of January.

Q.Upon that search, did you or not find any will of Mr. Lewis? - A. No; I did not.

Q.(Hands him a book). Do you know that book? - A. Yes; I saw this book with some other papers sent me from Sidmouth, by Mrs. Jenkins.

Q. Do you know the hand-writing? - A. I have very frequently seen Mr. Lewis write, and I believe this is hand-writing.

Q.Look at that will, and tell me, whether in your opinion that is the hand-writing of Mr. Lewis? - A. I don't think it is.

Q.Do you speak generally, or are there any particular circumstances in the writing that induce you to say so? - A. It appears differently from the signature that I have seen him sign several times.

Q. What is the difference between this signature and that you have seen him sign several times? - A. The letters appear to be rough, and not with the same freedom and ease that he was used to write with.

Q. By rough, do you mean jagged? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you deliver any to Mr. Phillips; and where did you get these papers that you did deliver to Mr. Stokes? - A. I had received a number of papers that I had received from Francis Lewis , and I delivered them to Mr. Stokes exactly in the state in which I had received them.

Q.Look at that book, do you know that? - A. A Mr. Robert Williams sent it me with a trunk of Mr. Lewis's papers.

Q. Who is he? - A. He was the attorney for Mrs. Kane and Sir John Briggs , in the trial of the ejectment.

Q. Do you know the hand-writing in that book? - A. It appears to me to be Mr. Lewis's writing; it was sent to me by Mr. Williams.

Q. Do you happen to know whether Mr. Thomas Morgan was in possession of the estate at Treleek house? - A. No, I do not.

Q. Do you know who took possession of the estate upon Mr. Lewis's death? - A. Grace Cornish , Mary Williams, Mary Harman , James Williams, and Susannah, his wife; Thomas Webber has since come over from America.

Court. Q. He did not take possession at that time? - A. No.

Q. Have the tenants attourned? - A. They have made formal attournments.

Q. Do you happen to know whether any rent has been paid to the heir at saw? - A. I have sold coppice wood and timber upon this estate, and accounted to the paternal heirs at law for it.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Now, my Lord, I shall state to your Lordship the next head of evidence,

which your Lordship has received in many late causes, the authenticity of signatures.

Mr. Justice Rooke. As to that kind of evidence, as far as my own practice has gone, it is such slight evidence, that forte persons will say one thing and some another; I have heard witnesses say, that in their opinion a signature must be a forged one; and on the other hand, others have said, that they did not believe it to be a forged one.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. I will not press it, my Lord.


Examined by Mr. Mills. Q. You were acquainted very well with Mr. Lewis? - A. Yes, for several years.

Q.Shortly state if you remember hearing him make any declarations respecting his will? - A. He has frequently declared to me he never intended to make his will; that the law had made his will.

Q. How lately before his death? - A. As nearly as I can recollect, about two years ago.

Q. Do you recollect in what way he expressed himself; did he speak of his intention to make one? - A. That he had had so much trouble with his mother's, that he never would make one.

Right Hon. Lord KENYON sworn.

Mr. Sergeant Adoir. Q. Does your Lordship recollect examining the witnesses to the will in question, when it was produced at Hereford assizes? - A. Yes, perfectly well.

Q. Will your Lordship have the goodness to state to the Court the account given by one of those witnesses, Austin, with respect to the execution of that will?

Mr. Erskine. If I could, in point of form, appeal to the noble and very learned Judge to pronounce upon the competency of the evidence, I should not trouble the Court; because, if my own life was at stake, instead of the gentleman's at the bar, I should be very glad to have that matter decided by the noble Judge who is called upon to give evidence, and I shall only say it does appear to me to be so extraordinary a proposition, that I shall not offer another sentence upon the subject.

Mr. Justice Rooke. I should wish my brother Adair to state how it can affect the prisoner.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. I conceive that upon the question whether this is or is not a genuine will, the account given of that will by the witnesses who attested the execution of it, is evidence against the prisoner.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Where are those witnesses?

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Austin is in the indictment.

Mr. Justice Rooke. You cannot examine his Lordship certainly to that.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. As far as they do go upon the question of its being a genuine will or not, though it has not the least relevancy, and if I had been informed that he had said one single word respecting Mr. Crossley in that examination, I am sure I would not have called the noble and learned Lord.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Do the witnesses swear that it is a forged will?

Mr. Serjeant Adair. No, my Lord, it is perhaps a little awkward upon the question of admissibility.

Mr. Justice Rooke. If Austin was here, and they were both upon trial, I certainly could not resist the evidence; but as it is not so, I certainly must.


Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. I believe you were the defendant in the ejectment tried at Hereford? - A. Certainly.

Q. At the time that ejectment was brought, were you in possession of the estate for which it was brought? - A. Yes.

Q.From whom did you inherit it? - A. I was in possession of it as maternal heir to Mr. Lewis.

Sir JOHN SCOTT sworn.(A paper handed to him).

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Do you know a person of the name of Eberno? - A. Certainly not.

Q. Did you ever give any advice to Mr. Crossley whatever, touching the subject matter of that letter? - A. Certainly not.

Q. Have you any knowledge of the facts referred to in it? - A. Certainly not.

Q. You had no idea perhaps of going into the West at that time? - A. Certainly not.

Mr. Morgan. Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow.

Q. You inherited that estate as maternal heir at law? - A. Yes.

Q. At what distance did you reside from Mr. Lewis during the latter part of his life? - A. About five miles.

Q. Then I take it for granted, as you were to inherit a considerable part of his property, that you frequently visited, and were upon very intimate terms? - A. Not for the last two years of his life.

Q.I don't mean to ask any improper question; but was the property, supposing this will to be out of the question, devolving to you, considerable? - A. To the best of my recollection it is worth nearly 200l. a year.

Q. Now, though there was no particular intimacy between you for the last two years, did you meet occasionally upon friendly terms? - A. I cannot say we did.

Q. Very much the contrary, I believe? - A. Yes; he had taken offence at some part of my conduct, and refused to speak to me when I accosted him.

Q. So that if accidentally you met in the street, and had civilly accosted him, he would not notice you? - A. After he had refused me once or twice, I never attempted it.

Q. How lately might you have seen him before his death? - A. I cannot speak with any accurate precision; it might be within three or four months to the best of my recollection.

Q. Did his resentment continue down to the time of his death, as far you know? - A. We were not upon speaking terms, as I told you, for the last two years of his life time.

Q. You know Mrs. Kane? - A. Very well.

Q. The mother of Lady Briggs? - A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Lewis pass a great deal of his time at her house; we have heard that he died there? - A. I cannot say as to that.

Court. The last witness said that he did.

Mr. Russell. Q. Do you know what proportion the part that you took, as maternal heir, bore to the whole property? - A. In the proportion of 170 to 830.

Court. Q. You have not been intimate with him for the last two years of his life; upon what terms were you with him the two years before? - A. Upon very good terms.

Q. Were you friendly? - A. Yes; he visited me frequently.


Q. Whose servant were you in July 1790? - A. Mr. Henry Lewis 's.

Q. Do you remember the receipt of any wages from him in the month of August 1791? - A. I received my wages in the month of August.

Q. Do you remember what day in the month of August you received those wages? - A. I cannot say rightly.

Q.Early, or the latter end of the month? - A. I believe it was the beginning.

Q. Do you know the hand-writing of Mr. Lewis? - A. I partly know it; I have seen a great deal of it.

Q. Did he enter what he paid into a book? - A. Yes; he generally did at the moment.

Q. Do you remember whether he did that in this month of August? - A. I cannot rightly recollect it.

Q. Look at that book; is that his hand-writing? - A. I think that is his hand-writing. (An entry of August 10, 1791, paid Elizabeth Parry 19s).

Q.Where did you live at that time? - A. At a place called Hygga, six or seven miles from Monmouth.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. We mean to shew, from repeated entries, from the 5th of August to the 12th, that he was at Hygga all that time.

Mr. Erstine. We have no objection to its being so taken, without examining further to it.


Examined by Mr. Mills. Q. Where do you live? - A. I live near Bath; I lived there in 1791.

Q. Do you know William Austin? - A. Yes.

Q. Should you know him if you were to see him? - A. Yes.

Q. What is he? - A. A carpenter and a builder.

Q. Have you ever been at his house? - A. No.

Q. Do you know any thing particularly about his way of life; whether he was in a low way of life or not? - A. I believe he is poor enough now.

Q. Did you know any thing of him in 1791? - A. I did not know any thing of his circumstances, only that he kept on building.

Mr. Garrow. Q. He was a builder, and when the Bath bank failed he failed? - A. I don't think the Bath bank hurt him much.

Mr. Mills. Q. Do you know Isgar? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember his going from Bath to Monmouth with you? - A. On Tuesday the 5th of May, 1795.

Q. What time did you get to Monmouth? - A. Between eleven and twelve; we staid there till eight o'clock the next morning.

Q. Did you see any body in company with Isgar at the King's-head? - A. I saw only one lady; and I don't know who she was.

Q. At what time was it? - A. After supper, about eleven o'clock.

Q. Was she present while you were together in the room? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see Isgar deliver any paper to the woman? - A. No.

Q. Did any thing pass between them?

Mr. Erskine. The conversation with Isgar, with respect to that instrument after its publication, cannot be evidence.

Q. You went away at eight next morning, and saw no body with Isgar but that lady; did you see any thing in his possession? - A. Nothing but a letter, directed to Mrs. Kane.

Q. You remember seeing a paper, on which there was a direction to Mrs. Kane? - A. Yes.

Q.You only saw it in his hand? - A. I never had it in my hand.

Q.(A paper shewn him.) Look at that, have you ever seen that before? - A. That is not what I saw.

Q.(Another paper shewn him.) - A. I believe this is the same.

Q.You believe that is the paper you saw in Isgar's hand? - A. I believe it is.

Mr. Garrow. Q. You saw it in his hand; that is all the opportunity you had of seeing it? - A. Yes; the first time I saw it in his hand was at Hygga.

Q. Had you seen it more than once? - A. No.

Q. When did you see it at Hygga? - A. Ten

o'clock at night; that is the place before we came to Monmouth.


Q. Do you know William Austin ? - A. Yes.

Q. How long have you known Austin? - A. About thirty years.

Q.For the last part of his life, what business was he in? - A. In the building way.

Q. Did he live at Bath? - A. Yes.

Q. What fort of a house did he keep? - A. A very bad house.

Q. Did you know Bowden? - A. Yes.

Q. What was he? - A. A builder likewise; I knew him to the day of his death.

Q. What occupation was he in before his death? - A. A builder; I never heard any thing against his character.

Q. Did Isgar live at Bath? - A. Yes; he undertook a little small business in the Country Court; he acted as an attorney.

Q. Did you ever see Austin write? - A. Yes; I have some of his writing in my pocket.

Q. Look at that, (shewing him a paper); do you believe that to be his hand-writing? - A. Yes; I will swear that is his name; (another paper shewn him,) that likewise has the appearance of his handwriting.

Cross-examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. You are very snort upon the subject of Isgar; do not you know him? - A. I know him perfectly well; I don't know as to his business.

Q. A good many lines he has been in; you knew him as a baker? - A. No; that was before I came to Bath.

Q. Perhaps he was a banker before you came? - A. I don't know that.

Q. You knew him as clerk to an attorney? - A. I know that he wrote letters to different people for money, and threatened them with law.

Q. Did you know him when he was an auctioneer? - A. No.

Q. Did you ever know a worse fellow in your life? - A. I heard he bore a bad character, and I believed it.

Q. Did you ever know a man of a more infamous character? - A. That was his general character.

THOMAS WEAVER (the younger) sworn.

Q. Do you know Sir John Briggs ? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Richard Holland ? - A. I have seen him several times.

Q. Do you know James Morgan ? - A. Yes.

Q. Where does James Morgan live? - A. At Norton, in the parish of Skenfreth.

Q.How far that from Monmouth? - A. About six or seven miles.

Q.Do you remember the funeral of Mr. Henry Lawn ? - A. I have heard of it.

Q. Did you see Mr. Holland and Sir John Briggs at the house of Mr. Morgan? - A. On the night before, as Sir John said he was going to the funeral as chief mourner.

Q. On that evening, who were at Mr. Morgan's? - A. My father for one, and one Michael Jones, and one Crump, I don't know what his name is besides Crump.

Q. Was Sir John Briggs there at first, or did he come in after the others? - A. He came in after we were there; Mr. Morgan asked me to stop, as he expected Sir John.

Q. When Sir John came in, what was the conversation that passed; you have said, he said was going to the funeral as chief mourner of Mr. Lewis? - A. Yes; when Sir John came in, be was in a violent passion, cursed and swore, and said, through the faults of Madam Kane, and his sister-in-law, he had lost a fortune of upwards of 2000l.

Q. Who was his sister-in-law? - A. He married a daughter of Madam Kane's.

Q. Did he state what the fault of Madam Kane was? - A. He said, if they had only spoken to Mr. Lewis to have made a will, he would have one it; but, said he, had I been at Mrs. Kanes, I would have made him make a will, and then I would have choaked him; Mr. Holland said, it was not too late yet to make a will, Mr. Holland asked Sir John, had he any of his writings by him; he said, he had letters of Mr. Lewis's, and that he could forge his hand to a nicety, or any other man's he had been used to; Sir John said, Madam Kane was very silly woman to deliver up the key and writings to Mr. Thomas Phillips , for Mr. Philips had the care of them: Sir John, or Mr. Holland, I don't know rightly which, said, if it had not been for that, he could have put a will among the writings; that was now put an end to.

Q. Was any thing else said? - A. No, nothing at all.

Q. Did you and your father go home before the company separated? - A. We went home, and left Mr. Holland and Sir John, at Mr. Morgan's-house.

Q. What are you? - A. I live with my father, my father is a farmer in Herefordshire, about seven or eight miles from Monmouth.

Cross-examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. This hapened at Mr. Morgan's? - A. Yes.

Q. What is Mr. Morgan? - A. A farmer, a freeholder.

Q. There were a good many people present besides those you have mentioned? - A. No; this was in the parlour, the other people were in the kitchen.

Q. It was very cold weather? - A. I don't recollect.

Q. Don't you recollect what weather it was the the 15th of last January? - A. No.

Q. You kept yourselves warm? - A. We were sitting by the fire in the parlour; Crump was not there nor Jones.

Q. You did not know much of Sir John Briggs ? - A. No; my father had dealings with him.

Q. Not very extensive dealings? - A. He owed him nine or ten pounds at a time.

Q. Your father is a very honest man? - A. I believe so.

Q. He is not that fort of man that would take a share in such a scandalous thing as forging a will? - A. No.

Q. I suppose you would not? - A. No.

Q. How long might all this conversation last? - A. I cannot tell the hour, they left it about two o'clock in the morning.

Q. How long did this conversation last? - A. It was most part of the discourse that night.

Q. Sir John was in a violent passion the whole of the time? - A. He came at in a passion.

Q. Did he get rid of his passion? - A. He was more quiet after.

Q. Was Mr. Holland in a passion to? - A. No.

Q. So Mr. Holland said it was not too late yet to make a will, and asked Sir John if he and any writings of Mr. Lewis's? - A. Yes.

Q. And Sir John answered, he could forge his hand to a nicety, and any other man's hand he had been used to? - A. Yes.

Q. All this was said in your prefence? - A. All in my presence.

Q. Soon after you came into the room? - A. I cannot say how soon.

THOMAS WEAVER (the elder) sworn.

Examined by Mr. Mills Q. Were you at Mr. Morgan's house when Sir John Briggs came in the day before the funeral of Mr. Lewis? - A. Yes.

Q. Who was with you? - A. My son and Mr. Holland; we went into the parlour.

Q. Was Sir John there when you first came into the room? - A. Sir John was not come when I went into the kitchen; Mr. Morgan said, don't go away yet, I expect the Baronet presently, he is gone in search of Mr. Lewis's will, I hope he will bring good news with him; soon after he came in, and Mr. Morgan asked what news, he looked very down, and said, he could not find a will; we went into the parlour and stopped till two or three in the morning.

Q. Did you hear Sir John say any thing more about the will? - A. Mr. Morgan asked him if he had met with any intelligence of the will; he said, no, he blamed Madam Kane, and said, through her conduct he had lost 2000l. or upwards; I said, sure, was it so much; he said, at least that; he said Mr. Phillips came up from, Monmouth to give us the possession of the effects; I refused it, he said, had he been there, he would have had a will, or would have choaked him. Mr. Holland said it was not too late to have a will; Mr. Holland said, if you had a will, how would you do as to signing it; Mr. Holland said he would trust no man to sign it, he would do it all himself; Mr. Holland tapped me on the shoulder, and said, I will run the risk of my neck for Sir John; and Sir John, and Mr. Morgan, and Mr. Holland, went all three out of the parlour together, and left my son and I in the parlour; they stopped out some little time, it might be from five to ten minutes for what I recollect; Mr. Holland then returned in by himself; he desired me to be absent; in a few minutes in came Sir John and Mr. Morgan.

Q. Did you go out? - A. I did not at that time; when they came in, as is always a custom, in Mr. Morgan's house, he said, Weaver, clear the board, and then be going home; I said to my son, it is time for us to be going; I looked for my hat, and felt for some silver, I had none, Sir John gave me a thilling, I went out and gave the shilling to the girl and went home.

Q. After this, did you see Sir John before the will was produced? - A. No.

Q. Do you remember at any time seeing a man of the name of Vincent? - A. I saw him several times, particularly one morning after the affizes at Heretord.

Q.Have you ever seen him at Mr. Holland's house? - A. I had never been at Mr. Holland's house when Vincent was there, till that day, after the affizes.

Q. Was he in the family? - A. Yes; I took him to be a part of the family.

Q. He was at the trial? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you seen him in the neighbourhood? - A. Yes, several times.

Q. Do you know any thing he did there? - A. He bought and sold horses.

Q. Did he buy and sell any thing else? - A. Not that I know of.

Q. Do you know Mr. Holland's hand-writing? Yes; I have seen him write.

Q.Were you present when Mr. Holland's house was searched? - A. Yes.

Q.Who was present with you? - A. Francis Lewis , the sheriss's-officer.

Q.Did you see any papers that were found there? - A. I did.

Q.Should you know them again? - A. Yes; I read every letter of them; Mr. Lewis searched the drawers, and every letter he found, he handed over

to me, and I read it, and carried off every thing I thought of consequence, (a paper shewn him).

Q. Do you remember that? - A. I recollect it very well; I wrote my name upon it with a pencil; Mr. Lewis took the papers away with him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. You have had occassion to repeat this story several times in public and in private? - A. Yes.

Q. And always in the same way? - A. As near as I recollect; I might not recollect every transaction of the night.

Q. Was the fire lit in the parlour before you went in, or after? - A. I believe, before we went in.

Q. It was very cold at that time? - A. Very cold.

Q. It is a remarkable expression you have used-Mr. Holland tapped you on the shoulder and said, I will run the risk of my neck for Sir John? - A. Yes.

Q. You are quite as certain of that as any other part of the conversation? - A. Yes.

Q. It was a remarkable part of the conversation? - A. Yes.

Q. You were examined at the affizes of Hereford? - A. Yes.

Q. You did not say a syllable of this at that time? - A. I believe, I did not recollect it at that time.

Q. You certainly did not state it at that time? - A. No.

Q. Was Mr. Holland there at that time? - A. I did not see him.

Q. You don't happen to know whether he was there or not? - A. I believe, he was ill at that time.

Q. You did not state it at Hereford? - A. I might forget a great many expressions.

Q. Sir John was very much cast down? - A. He seemed to be low, when he came in, his spirits recoverted, and he damned, and swore pretty well.

Q. He complained he had had a fruitless journey? - A. I think he said he had been at the Star in search of the will, between the passage and Hereford.

Q.Whether you or your son recollect the cir-cumstance of Mr. Holland saying he would run the risk of his life for Sir John? - A. I told my son to recollect as near as he could every passage that happened that night.

Q. When was that; since you came to town, of before? - A. Before.

Q. Before the Hereford affizes, or after? - A. Before the affizes.

Q.Your son Tom told you what he had recollected? - A. He shewed it me, he had put it down upon paper; after Mr. Phillips had been at our house, he wrote down his recollections upon paper, and I did the same as near as I could.

Q. Before the affizes? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you taken the trouble to write down since, any thing that you have recollected? - A. Yes; before I came to London.

Q. Have you brought it with you? - A. Yes.

Q. When was it this circumstance of Mr. Holland's tapping you on the shoulder, and telling you he would run the risk of his neck for Sir John, first struck you? - A. I made a memorandum of it before the affizes; but I had forgot it.

Q. Was it in your son's memorandum? - A. I cannot say, I believe he did not recollect it, when of course we compared papers together.

Q. Sir John had no shyness about this at all; he spoke of it as you and I should about buying beasts at the market? - A. It was publicly enough.

Q. Mr. Holland asked, how would you manage respecting the signing of it; and then Mr. Holland said, I would trust nobody to sign it but myself? - A. Yes.

Q. You are sure Sir John made no answer to it? - A. I am positive he did not; there was nobody present in the parlour when he tapped me upon the shoulder, but my son and myself; Mr. Morgan was gone out.

Q. Sir John was not in the room? - A. No.

Q. But I am speaking as to the time that he tapped you upon the shoulder? - A. He was in the room then.

Q. And nobody answered the question? - A. No; he put the question and answered it himself; he said, I would not trust any body; I would do the will myself.

Q. At this time Mr. Holland and Sir John and your son were all present? - A. Just so, and Mr. Morgan.

Q. You were attentive to the question he put to Sir John? - A. Yes.

Q. And therefore, if Sir John had made an answer, you are sure you must have heard it? - A. I am positively sure he made no answer.


Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. Did you find any thing upon Austin? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you got it with you? - A. I have, (produces a note for 100l).

WEAVER (the younger) called again.

Q. Look at that, do you believe that to be Mr. Holland's hand-writing? - A. Yes, I do.

Q.(To Williams). Did you at any time search Austin? - A. Yes; I went with another, to take Isgar and Austin; I brought him before the Magistrate that evening, and he was sent to prison for

further examination; when committed for trial, I went to the prison, and was present when the turnkey searched him.

Q. Was that paper you shewed to Weaver just now, found upon Mr. Austin? - A. Yes; it was pinned within side the lining of his hat.


Examined by Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. I believe you were Mayor of Hereford? - A. I acted as Mayor.

Q. Did you take any examination from any person respecting this business, from a person of the name of Isgar? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you got that examination? - A. I have. (produces it).

Q. Have you figned your name to it? - A. I have.

Q. Were you present when that examination, whatever it contains, was taken? - A. I was present.

Q. Did Isgar give that account of himself freely or voluntarily, or were threats made use of? - A. As free as man could possibly do; he gave his evidence very free.

Q. Did you at any time receive any books; if you did, tell us from whom you received them, and to whom you delivered them again? - A. This book I received from Mr. Stokes.

Q. Did you return them in the condition in which you received them? - A. I did; I put a private mark upon them.

Cross-examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. This examination, taken by you, of Isgar, was taken without threats or promise of any kind? - A. Yes.

Q. And, I take it, in a matter of this moment, it was taken with deliberation, and read over to the man? - A. Yes, deliberately; and read over to him.

Q. So that he knew of course the contents? - A. Yes.

Q. And might have made any alteration in it if it was not consistent with what he pleased to declare? - A. Just so; that is quite a fact; for that part that is erased, he objected against.

Q. And if he had made any other objections, of course, any other parts would have been also erased? - A. Yes; the examination was taken previous to the trial.

JACOB ISGAR sworn on the voire dire.

Mr. Erskine. (To Stokes). Q. This is the man who proved the will at the affizes? - A. Yes.

Mr. Erskine. (To Isgar). Q. You heard just now, what was mentioned by Mr. Stokes here, which you can confirm; I take it for granted that you are the person who proved the will, as one of the witnesses to it, at the affizes at Hereford? - A. Yes; I did.

Q. We have also had the Magistrate here, Mr. Barrow, who delivered this into Court as your voluntary declaration upon oath? - A. It is so.

Q. He tells us further, that it was read over to you, and that that erasure was made at your request, not containing that matter you could swear to; and that all the rest was deliberately sworn to, by you, after you had heard and read the contents; is that true, sir? - A. It is.

Q.Take it into your hand; that information which you have in your hand, you know, of course, as you have reason to know, and to recollect, the contents of that information you have sworn to?

Mr. Sergeant Adair. This is a cross-examination before he is sworn in chief.

Mr. Erskine. My Lord, I certainly could, if I chose, read the whole of it: you have, in that information, contradicted directly, the oath you made at the affizes? - A. Yes; I believe I have.

Mr. Erskine. Now, then, you will withdraw.(The witness goes out of Court.)

Mr. Erskine. My Lord, the objection I am about to make is, to the competency of this witness; and, my Lord, I make that objection after very long deliberation, and after much discussion of the subject. Your Lordship may depend upon it, that in what I now say, I am strictly addressing myself to the Court; I could indeed give your Lordship my honour, if it were necessary, that I rise simply to address the Court upon that point of law, and not by a side wind to depreciate the witness in the understanding of the Jury.

My Lord, the objection that I take to Isgar is this, that the whole foundation of the credit which is due to any witness in Court, as Mr. Sergeant Adair has well expressed it, is, that he speaks under the solemnity of an oath; your Lordship can hear nothing from any man under any other fanction. My Lord, I admit, if any credit whatever can be given to his oath in a Court of Justice, he must be examined, however blassed his character may be, however he may be a witness totally unworthy to stand in a Court of Justice, however in the opinions of all who receive his evidence, and are to deside upon it, he may he perjured; upon subjects collateral to the subject in question, I would not waste your Lordship's time upon the objection; because, however infamous a man may be, however it may be his ordinary habit to impose no rules of veracity upon himself, he is still a witness; and upon this plain ground, that a man, however wicked, is not always wicked; he has not always temptations to wickedness; and although a man may have forsworn himself a thousand and a thousand times, unless the mark is set upon him, by a judgment of perjury, he shall be received as a witness, because his oath may have some value in the particular instance in which he is to be sworn; because his oath has never been opposed by his oath in the particular instance; and it is impossible for the Judge to say, that the man is not entitled, perhaps in the opinion of the Jury, to some scintilla of credit upon which other testimony may be built. But, my Lord, the objection which I take to the witness is this, that he is called up here, or he is called up for no

thing; to say that that will to which he has given authenticity upon his oath before the learned and noble ludge, who sat here some time ago, at Hereford, which he swore he saw executed in the presence of the deceased Henry Lewis , and in the presence of the witnesses Austin, himself, and Bowden now deceased, is no will of Henry Lewis ; that he did not see him execute it; that it was not signed in his presence, or in the presence of the witnesses. Now, my Lord, the first matter I have to ask your Lordship is this, and by the answer I receive to that proposition, let my objection stand or fall, are these two propositions collateral to one another, or are they not? - If they are not absolutely inconsident, and abselutely and directly repugnant to one another, my objection falls undoubtedly as it ought. Suppose I had asked him-did you not, at the affizes at Hereford, swear you saw a man on Thursday: and after that, swore you did not see the same man on Thursday? in matter, collateral to the subject, it might have been said, and truly, to destroy all credit due to this man; because, how can the Jury take the oath of a man who has acknowledged in public Court, that he has forsworn himself? yet, peradventure, the man who has forsworn himself upon these different occasions, may not have the same temptation to commit a perjury in the instance before the Court; and therefore it is for the Jury to weigh, in point of credit, and not for your Lordships, in point of competency, to repel the oath of a witness standing under such derestable and abhorrent circumstances; but, my Lord, that is not this case. This case is-that the man having sworn two ways, first that it is the will, and then that it is not, offers, by his oath, to give one of those propositions a preponderance over the other, so as to build something in addition to that oath, by telling your Lordship that this will is not the will of Henry Lewis .

Now, my Lord, the question is, whether any credit can be given to that? any credit-my Lord, I should ask what credit? if a man has sworn to two propositions diamettically repugnant and contradictory of one another, which involves him, upon his own confession, not only in a perjury, but a perjury in the direct instance before the Court; how is it possible? I speak to reasonable men, and I speak in point of competency, not in point of credit, that if the competency of a witness is to depend upon any authenticity that he can give to a transaction upon his oath, if his oath is divided between these two propofitions, and has equally belonged to both of them, how is it possible to give him any credit. Now, my Lord, in order to try this case; and I observe your Lordship turning to some authority, which is natural enough. My Lord, no man feels more reverence than I do for the collective wisdom of ages, which constitutes the law of this country; no man bows more implicitly than I do to the authority of precedents, which, undoubredly, build up, and cement the fabric of our laws and constitution; and wherever I find a precedent, although the inclination of my judgment is strongly drawn against the foundation upon which that precedent is built; I bow to the precedent, unless I find it in the situation of those precedents, if any such there are, that are diametrically repugnant to the principles of jurisprudence everywhere, and aspecially to the principles of justice as immecmorially acted upon in this country, My Lord, it is a maxim which cannot he broken in upon, that it is only the sanction of the oath that consers the competency upon the individual; if a man knows nothing of the Supreme Being, the internal appeal to whom constitutes the fanction of an oath, he cannot be sworn at all; he may, if he is of another religion, because, in whatever view the mind of man has the impression of the Divinity stamped upon it; it is supposed that person speaks under the insluence of the education he may have received; but what is the case here? the man has sworn that it is the will, and he has sworn that it is not. Now, my Lord, I mean to give Isgar something that does not belong to him, in order to try this case; I will suppose he is no accomplice, and was now to be examined, and was to swear, that upon some given day, the 26th or 27th of April (no matter what day) this forgery was committed by Mr. Crossley, and the case so closes, could your Lordship leave it to the Jury? would there be any thing to leave to the Jury, with no other circumstances added to it? and we shall come to see whether when a thing is nothing, any thing added to it can make it something; good God! is it possible for any man, whose reason is not disordered, to say, that when a man has sworn the will was a true will, and the same man has sworn the same will was not a true will, that your Lordship upon his single unsupported evidence could desire the Jury to guess at which of his oaths is the true one, and to put the man's life in jeopardy, by even stating it to be evidence to go to the Jury. Now I am either wrong in this, or I am right, and I desire to have the opinion of your Lordships upon this, whether the man, blasted as he is, if that could be removed from him, so that your Lordship might, when the man is examined, put the cause upon his evidence, aye or no; could the Judges of England state that a man who had sworn two propositions staring one another in the face, upon which you have nothing to do but to arraign him according to the law of England, upon his own oath, without any extrinsic evidence, laying hold of him-as such a miscreant ought to be laid hold of, what could he avow, but that one of the two propositions was uttered by mistake; but here, the man admits that he signed the oath with deliberation, and was subject to no mistake; that he took the second oath also with deliberation; and that the one is true and the other salse, would your Lordship's leave it as a matter of evidence, which of the two are true, upon the evidence of a man who alone is to tell you, which is true, the very same man who has shewn himself to be entitled to no credit whatever, when he has sworn to these two repuguant propositions?

Now, my Lord, let us see whether what I have now stated is broken in upon by any of the rules and principles of law. My lord, I hold in my hand the observation made by my learned friend; Mr. Sergeant Adair, upon the law concerning accomplices; and I agree with him, it has been lucidly and properly stated; and I know that the favour and tenderness shewn to human life in this country, so remarkable for its justice, has frequently led to a delicacy upon the subject of accomplices, that I never felt, whether an accomplice shall be examined first or after he is corroborated; I think he ought to be examined first, for the best of all possible reasons, because

he is a competent witness, though the humanity of the law is such (but I am not addressing you upon urbanity) that it is only from tenderness, that after an accomplice is admitted, the Court will not build any thing upon his testimony, unless he is confirmed, because of the great danger there would be of admitting such a man as a witness; but I do say, that though he is a worthless witness, and though undoubtedly he deserves what Mr. Sergeant Adair stated of him, and which I shall not repeat, yet still his evidence must go to the Jury, because he has not, by swearing both ways, destroyed, by his own conduct, the foundation of all credit due to his testimony, which foundation is alone the fanction of an oath.

Now, my Lord, I come to the last point, and I do confess, I think, and, my Lord, I have thought of it a great deal, that it is impossible for a greater fallacy to be imposed upon the human understanding than this. This man is a worthless incredible witness, and taken by himself, my learned friend says, he is of no value at all; he does not put it of small comparative value with other witnesses, but he states boldly that he is of no value at all; but he says, though it may be true that his oath cannot receive any fanction from a Court, yet that there may be circumstances arising from Mr. Crossley's own act accumulating upon one another, which may fasten the crime upon Mr. Crossley, I agree to it; and though, undoubtedly, I should do my duty to the utmost to the prisoner, yet, most undoubredly, if I saw such transactions belonging to him, I should say, he must suffer the law upon that evidence; but the question is, whether by taking Isgar's evidence as the foundation, and taking it as nothing, you can erect it into something, by surrounding it with other matters, which, as far as they throw light upon one another, do, I admit, constitute a body of evidence which may, peradventure, in this case, be sufficient for conviction; but I would humbly ask your Lordship, (I speak earnestly, my Lord, because I speak feelingly,) how can that confirm the evidence of that man, which was before stated as nothing; and how can that nothing be converted into something, by the addition of other materials by which that nothing is to be supported?

My Lord, I know there is no other way to support moral truths, but by turning back to that which is the foundation of all certainty, I mean the calculations of matter; the calculations of matter, and the truths belonging to them, must be the foundation of all your reasonings in the world; then I would add this: I want to make up a sum, and for forms sake I begin with nothing but a nought; I put down that nought, and then I am to make up a sum by the progression of numbers, by a great number of units, which will amount to a particular sum in the calculation, be it so; those different units may be sufficient to answer the purpose of the calculator, and may answer the purpose of material demonstration for which they are produced; but will the adding them together, or multiplying them together, erect a nothing into something; and will you make that progression of numbers different, when added to that which was before nothing, and make them tell differently in any quotient, because there is that before it, which it is admitted, by itself, is nothing; but which having lost its nothingness. acquired a local habitation, and a name? My Lord, I can only say, my mind revolts at such a propossion, and I shall think I am getting into a second childhood, when I find my mind stagger from the contrary proposition.

Then, to bring your Lordship back again, added to this, you have the man as an accomplice, I have been trying him as not being an accomplice; and the reason why I have tried him as not being an accomplice is, because it entitles me to give your Lordship a view of the subject, that I could not have given you if he were an accomplice; because, if he were not an accomplice, your Lordship would be driven, perhaps, in the coarse of the cause, to come to this very principle, that after the man had finished his evidence, and the case was finished, your Lordship would be driven to say to the Jury, that it was matter for them to deliberate which of the two contrary propositions is the true one; and which none but he can divulge, by only the same oath which had been given equally first to the one and then to the other; why, then the only answer is this, if a man swears to two propositions, the oue extremely improbable, the other very much probable: that the one has nothing to give credibility to it, that the other is confirmed by every thing that confers credibility, would you not then admit it? - yes, certainly; but not that the witness shall add any thing to it, upon his oath; I can examine the proposition as it is an intrinsic proposition; I can examine all the probabilities by which that intrinsic proposition is supported upon the one hand, and by which the improbability is made stronger upon the other; and when I have done that, I have sufficient, by the rules of criminal law, to direct a Jury, upon all those circumstances together, to find a man guilty of forgery; I should do it with a calm spirit, and with a consciousness that I was performing my duty to the country; but what I dread and tremble at is, - that upon your Lordship's judgment, which I should be sorry to hear pronounced, that man, as he has described himself, is to be set up here, and is to lay a foundation, and that the Jury are to suppose, under your Lordship's judgment, as they must undoubtedly, if your Lordship sets him up as a witness; it is telling the Jury some credit is due to him; it is leaving it to them undoubtedly; but it is allowing him some credit; when, I contend, not a scintilla of credit is due to him; and which it is admitted at the very moment it is received, to be in fact good for nothing. I confess, it does make a strong impression upon my mind; it appears to me, to be making use of evidence of no value at all for that is my proposition); and after you have got it, then you build other things upon it, by taking a foundation which is, in fact, no foundation at all; and if the man is ultimately convicted, it will not be upon the circumstances themselves to which credit is due, coupled together, but upon these circumstances built upon that which in the opening is admitted literally to be nothing.

I beg your Lordship's pardon, for having detained the Court so long; I feel this objection strongly, and I therefore have expressed it strongly.

The objection to laizar's competency was supported also by Mr. Garrow and Mr. Fielding; when Mr. Sergeant Adair rose to answer them.

Mr. Justice Rooke. Brother Adair, you need not trou

ble yourself; I have paid great attention to Mr. Erskine and Mr. Garrow, as I always do; they are very able men, but they have not brought conviction to my mind; and it is a singular stage in which they have taken the objection, after having sworn the man upon the voire dire, because he has perjured himself in the very fact in question before the Court; that the man has sworn contrary ways before, there can be, I presume, no doubt; I know nothing but from the opening on the one side, and the statement on the other; I will suppose this man has sworn to facts directly contrary one to the other, but he is brought here now, not with any conviction upon his head, he is brought here as a person who labours under very great suspicions; but he has not been convicted of the crime of perjury. Now, it is admitted in the course of this argument, that, if this man had been convicted of the crime of perjury, and pardoned, or if he had been pardoned without any conviction, his evidence might have been received; if that be so, I cannot point out to myself any ground upon which that man, who, if he was pardoned, might be received as a witness, should not be an admissible evidence, when not having been convicted, no pardon can be necessary. I do not now chuse to say a word about the credit that I think may be due to him; - not a word about what the Jury ought to think of the witness; here after we shall hear what he says, and how he is corroborated; but, in my opinion, in strict point of law, this witness is admissible.

JACOB ISGAR called in again.

Examined by Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Do you know Richard Holland ? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember his being in London at any time about the month of February, 1795; this time twelvemont? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you recollect about what time in the month it was? - A. I believe about the 17th.

Q. Did you see Richard Holland in London at that time? - A. Yes.

Q. Upon what occasion did you see him, and in company with whom? - A. I saw him in company with one Mr. Clark an attorney; I believe his name is Mr. William Clark.

Q. Where did you see them in company together? - A. At the Cock, at Temple-bar.

Q. What was the subject at that time; had it any relation to the subject matter that the Court is now upon? - A. No; not then; the business was this-the Court was moved against me in the Common Pleas.

Q. You must not tell us that, it is not material; while you were there did any thing pass relative to the subject matter of this enquiry, relative to any will of the Rev. Mr. Lewis? - A. No; not on the part of Mr. Holland; Mr. Clark asked me, if I made wills.

Q. Where did you live in the month of March last? - A. In the parish of Lincoln and Whitcomb.

Q. Did you live at Bath? - A. In the suburbs, not in the city.

Q.Whereabouts? - A. In Timber's-court.

Q. The other side of the old bridge, at Bath? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember Richard Holland coming at any time to your house, in the month of March? - A. Several times in March and April.

Q. Upon what business did he come to your house? - A. Respecting making a will for Mr. Lewis, who had been dead some time past.

Q. Did he at that time produce any paper to you? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know what bacame of that paper afterwards; or did he request you to do any thing? - A. He requested me to copy it upon a paper, which paper I copied.

Q. In your own hand-writing? - A. I did.

Q. Did you copy it upon paper in your own house; or who brought the paper upon which you wrote the copy? - A. The paper was brought by Mr. Holland; and Mr. Lewis's name put thereunto.

Q. Was the name of Lewis to it when Mr. Holland brought it to you? - A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Holland say any thing to you with respect to that paper which he brought? - A. He said, the paper that he brought he took care that it was old enough; that it should not be found out that way.

Q. Upon that paper he so brought, you copied something? - A. Yes.

Q. Should you know the copy again if you saw it? - A. Yes, I should, (the will shewn him); I know it very well; I wrote it.

Q. Are you sure that is the paper that you wrote at that time? - A. This is the paper that was brought to me; and I sent it to the Abergavenny Post-office or Monmouth; I have written letters to both places; I am not sure which.

Q. Do you recollect how it was directed, or do you not? - A. I believe it was directed for Peter James; to be left at the Post-office till called for.

Q. When you sent it, was the name of Henry Lewis written upon it once or oftener? - A. No more than once.

Q. However they have come there has been since? - A. Yes,

Q.That is the paper, and it is in your handwriting? - A. It is.

Q. Do you know Sir John Briggs ? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you at any time, and when, see him at Bath? - A. I saw him several times.

Q. About what time of the year? - A. I believe the first time I saw him that that will was not then drawn, though he asked me for it.

Q. Do you recollect upon what subject did Sir John Briggs call upon you? - A. He called upon me when he received that will; he said, this will

not do; Mr. Lewis was a very particular man, and therefore we must get a better one; do you know one George Crossley.

Q.Throughout your evidence you must not tell us any thing about Mr. Crossley, except what passed when Mr. Crossley himself was present; do not tell us what any body said about Mr. Crossley, except when he was present, or you communicated to him afterwards; what did Sir John apply to you about, excepting every thing that relates to Mr. Crossley? - A. He said, that would not do.

Q. He had not the will with him at the time? - A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. You had seen him before that? - A. Yes.

Q.After you had sent this will, you saw Sir John Briggs, and he said, the will you sent would not do; had you sent any other will than that at that time? - A. I had not.

Q. Did he tell you why it would not do? - A. He said, Mr. Lewis was a very particular man, and therefore, that will would not do; we must get a better; he would have a little alteration.

Q. Do you remember, at any time, Sir John Briggs having that will any of the times that he came to you? - A. I never saw him with it.

Q. Do you remember Holland coming to you after you had seen Sir John Briggs? - A. I saw Holland in London afterwards.

Q. Do you recollect whether you saw Mr. Holland at any time after you sent that will to Bath? - A. I did.

Q. Upon what occasion did you see Mr. Holland there? - A. He told me there was a person wished to see me there; I went and it was Mr. Crossley.

Q. What time was that when you went and saw Mr. Crossley? - A. I do not remember the day of the month in particular, it was about the 10th or 11th of April, perhaps.

Q. How long have you known Mr. Crossley? - A. Four or five years.

Q. Where did you find Crossley when Mr. Holland took you to him? - A. At the Three Tuns.

Q. Who keeps that house? - A. One Mr. Ballinger.

Q. Who did you see at the Three Tuns, besides Mr. Crossley and Mr. Holland? - A. I did not see any body else there in the business.

Q. Did you see any other person in company with them, or did you take any other person with you, during the time you were then at Bath? - A. I believe, William Austin.

Q. Do you recollect whether you did or not? - A. I cannot be positive.

Q. What passed at that meeting while Mr. Crossley was present at the Three Tuns? - A. He desired that me and Austin might accompany him and Mr. Holland; at least to meet them at the Globe, at Newton, the morning following, which was on a Saturday, I think, the 11th of April.

Q. Where is Newton? - A. Between Bristol and Bath; Austin went before with Mr. Crossley; and Mr. Holland and I rode after.

Q. Did you, upon that, see Austin either then or afterwards? - A. Austin went with me the morning following.

Q. Did Mr. Crossley tell you, or any body else in Mr. Crossley's presence, for what you were to meet at the Globe, at Newton? - A. I don't recollect, but it was some conversation about this will.

Q.Was it stated to have been respecting any will at all, in Mr. Crossley's presence? - A. Mr. Crossley and Mr. Holland went forward first together; there was nothing particular passed.

Q. Had you at any time before you went to the Globe, at Newton, disclosed to Mr. Austin the business that you had been concerned in? - A. Yes.

Q. What had you said to Mr. Austin about it? - A. I told Mr. Austin this, that I knew a person that wanted a witness to a will, and that he might get 100l. if he wanted to get 100l.

Q. Did he refuse, or did he agree to it? - A. Mr. Austin said, I would put my name to an hundred wills for that money, or something of that sort.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Holland and Mr. Austin together at Bath? - A. Yes.

Q. Did any thing pass between Mr. Holland and Mr. Austin relative to the will? - A. Yes.

Q.What passed between them? - A. Mr. Austin and Mr. Holland were at a public-house with me, the French Horn, or Seven Stars; Mr. Austin would not agree to do any thing in the will without a note for 100l. to make sure of his money; he said, he could not give him a note of 100l. unless they should recover the property.

Q. Did Mr. Holland at last agree, or refuse to give the note of 100l.? - A. He gave the note.

Q. Should you know it, do you think, if you saw it again? - A. Most certainly I should; (it is shewn him); this is it; here is an alteration; he would not have "or order," and it was interlined"James Smith."

Q. Was it ready written? - A. No; I believe the stamp was out of my own pocket.

Q.Have you any particular recollection as to the date of the note? - A. No, I have not.

Q. Who went with you to Newton? - A. Mr. Austin and I went, and Mr. Crossley and Mr. Holland; we rode there.

Q.What day was it? - A. I think the 11th of April, but I cannot be sure of it.

Q. Do you recollect of whom you hired your

houses? - A. I believe it was Aborfield or Merrifield, a man that keeps horses, in Corn-street.

Q. Did you find Mr. Holland and Mr. Crossley there, or how? - A. When we went to get the horses, we saw Mr. Holland and Mr. Crossley riding by before us, about 100 yards distance.

Q. When you got to Newton, did you see any body there? - A. Nobody else, and Mr. Austin did not come in at that time.

Q. What passed there in the presence of Mr. Crossley? - A. Mr. Crossley drew up a long copy of a note to send to Mr. Lewis, to inform him that I had a will of such a person's, one Lewis, a corn-factor, of Monmouth, I believe.

Q. Did any thing more pass at that meeting, relative to that will? - A. Not in particular.

Q. At that time you had not drawn the will? - A. No.

Q. Do you recollect whether any thing more passed with respect to that will, before you parted at the Globe? - A. Nothing particular; upon Mr. Crossley's return to Bath, I received a note from him, as I was going to Eath.

Q. Have you that note? - A. No, I destroyed it; I saw him afterwards at Bath, and he asked me if I had a note drawn by a nephew of his, one John Upsell; I told him I had; it came to me in a letter directed to Jacob Isgar , Bath.

Q. Had you such a bill? - A. I had; he said, you owe me some money, will you give me a bill; I said, I have no objection; says he, I will give you ten guineas, and cry quits with you, and then he gave me two five guinea bills of the Abergavenny Bank; the note was for 50l.

Q. After that transaction had passed, did any thing further pass between Mr. Crossley and you at that time? - A. Not in particular that night as I recollect; I had got a great deal of liquor.

Q. Did you after that night that you had given Mr. Crossley the bill, and he had given you the two five guinea notes, did you see him again before he left Bath? - A. I saw him on the Monday at the same place.

Q. Did any thing pass then? - A. Not in particular, further than one Mr. Dean was there, and he asked Mr. Dean if he would be security for the payment of the money that I owed him the balance of the bill.

Q. Was that before or after you had given him the bill? - A. After; that was to blind Mr. Dean, that he might know I was satisfied.

Q. Did any further conversation pass before Mr. Crossley left Bath, between you and him, relative to this subject matter? - A. Nothing in particular.

Q. Do you recollect about what time Mr. Crossley left Bath? - A. The same day, I presume.

Q. Did you at any time after that go up to London? - A. Yes.

Q. For what purpose did you go to London, and at whose desire? - A. Sir John Briggs desired me to go; I went on the 25th of April in the morning.

Q. By what coach? - A. I believe the coach went from the White-Lion; I cannot tell; I took my chance of the road; Sir John Briggs gave me two guineas.

Q. Did any body go with you? - A. Yes; William Austin .

Q. Was it by the desire of Sir John Briggs that you both went? - A. Yes.

Q. Where did you arrive when you got to London? - A. I went to the Golden Cross, Charing-Cross; Mr. Austin stopped at the White-horse cellar; I enquired at the Golden Cross for Sir John Briggs, and saw him there.

Q. Did you see any body else? - A. No.

Q. Did Sir John Briggs desire you to go any where else in London at that time? - A. Mr. Crossley's.

Q.When did you go in pursuance of that direction to Mr. Crossley's? - A. About a quarter of an hour after; this was on the Sunday morning.

Q. Did you see Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes.

Q.Did Mr. Austin go with you at that time? - A. No.

Q. Did you see any body besides Mr. Crossley at that time? - A. I don't recollect that I did.

Q. Had you any conversation with Mr. Crossley at that time? - A. I told him Sir John Briggs would be glad to speak to him at the Golden Cross.

Q. Did you tell Mr. Crossley what Sir John Briggs wanted him upon? - A. I really don't know whether I mentioned any thing of that sort or not.

Q. Did Mr. Crossley go to the Golden Cross to see Sir John Briggs? - A. He did not; he desired me to go and tell Sir John Briggs to come to his house, which I did, and I went part of the way with Sir John Briggs to his house.

Q.Where did you lodge at that time? - A. One Mr. Noad's, in St. Martin's-lane; I understood Mr. Austin had been there while I was out.

Q. How soon after that did you see Mr. Austin? - A About three o'clock that day.

Q. Where did Mr. Austin lodge during the remainder of the time that you remained in town? - A. I believe, he lodged at the house where I lived.

Q. Did he or did he not? - A. I believe he did.

Q.Was he with you there? - A. Yes, he was.

Q. When did Mr. Austin go out of town? - A. Not for two or three days after that, I believe.

Q. Did you go out of town with him? - A. No.

Q. Now between that time and the time that

Mr. Austin went out of town, did you see Mr. Crossley again? - A. Yes, at his own house.

Q. Did Mr. Crossley ever come to Mr. Noad's, While you were in town? - A. I believe not then, nor during that time of my being in town.

Q. Did you see Mr. Crossley then at any time before Mr. Austin went out of town? - A. I saw him on the Sunday that we arrived in town.

Q. Did you see him again, before Mr. Austin went out of town, after you had sent Sir John Briggs to Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes; Mr. Austin went with me.

Q. Was that on the same day or another? - A. The same day.

Q. When Mr. Austin and you went to Mr. Crossley's, who did you see there? - No person that I recollect, except Mr. Crossley; whether the servant came to the door, or him, I don't know; I went up into the back dining-room.

Q. Was any body in that room besides you and Mr. Crossley and Mr. Austin? - A. No.

Q. What passed between you at that time? - A. There was a bottle of wine upon the table and two glasses; he asked us to take a glass of wine; he went into the front dining-room, and brought out two pieces of paper, purporting to be the will of Mr. Lewis.

Q. Were there any other persons in that room? - A. There were; I think I heard Sir John Briggs ' voice, but I am not sure; the two pieces of paper had Henry Lewis wrote upon them, but no witnesses' names.

Q. Was the one a counterpart of the other? - A. I think it was, they were both signed by the name of Henry Lewis .

Q.Were they completely written before they were brought to you, or was any thing done to them afterwards? - A. Nothing was done to them afterwards.

Q. For what purpose were those two papers brought into the room to you? - A. For us to attest it as witnesses.

Q. Did you do so? - A. Yes; William Austin wrote his name first, and then he wrote the name of Thomas Bowden, and then I wrote mine.

Q. Did you know Thomas Bowden? - A. Yes.

Q.Was he dead at that time? - A. Yes; sometime before.

Q. Was he known to be dead by Mr. Austin? - A. Yes, well known.

Q. By whose direction did you and Mr. Austin subscribe your names to that will? - A. By the direction of Mr. Crossley.

Q. Do you remember any particular expression that Mr. Crossley made use of upon that occasion? - A. When Mr. Crossley brought the two papers, purporting to be the will, he laid them upon the table, and said, now sign your two names, and take care the devil don't tap you upon the shoulders.

Q. Did any particular conversation pass at that time before you parted? - A. Not in particular:

Q.After that, did you yourself see Mr. Crossley again before you left town? - A. Yes.

Q.How soon after? - A. I saw him on the Monday following; I wanted some money of him to send Mr. Austin home again.

Q. You and Mr. Austin went home together, did not you? - A. No; Mr. Crossley gave me three guineas, or three guineas and an half, I am not quite sure whether it was Monday or Tuesday.

Q. Did you at any time ask him, or he you, any questions about the will? - A. I asked him about the will, I asked him why he made two parts; he said, that he made two parts for this reason, in case I should be detected, and Mr. Austin at the trial, that he and his clerks might come and prove that the old gentleman left it with him.

Q.What became of the two parts of the will? - A. One was put up in a cover directed for Mrs. Kane, after I had left the will on the table, and the other Mr. Crossley kept.

Q.What became of the other? - A. I left it.

Q.What day was it when you left town? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Do you recollect any thing of your own affairs happening before you left town? - A. Not particularly.

Q. Was any business of your own transacted while you were in town? - A. There was an attachment against me in the Court of Common Pleas, at least the rule was made absolute, and I was bailed before his Lordship.

Q. Who transacted the business of the bail? - A. Mr. Crossley got me the bail, and procured me the attorney, his name was Price, I believe.

Q. The bail was put in? - A. Yes.

Q. How long did you stay after the bail was put in? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Did you go out of town that day, or the day after? - A. I don't recollect.

Q.After the bail was put in how long did you stay there? - A. I don't know.

Q. Did Mr. Crossley, after you had asked him the question about that will, did he say any thing more about the will, that you can recollect? - A. Not in particular; he said he took care that the paper should be old enough, that it might not be discovered.

Q.What became of the letter you wrote to Mr. Lewis, at Monmonth; when did you send it? - A. I suppose, about the 12th or 13th of April, I am not quite sure to the day, it bears date before that, I believe.

Q. Do you recollect about what time in April that letter was actually sent? - A. I don't recollect particularly the day of the month.

Q. Is this the letter (shewing it him)? - A. Yes, it is the letter.

Q. Did you ever receive any other money from Mr. Crossley than the change of that 50l. bill? - A. Yes.

Q. What further sum did you receive from him? - A. I think, ten pounds or guineas; I am not sure which, it was an order upon his banker.

Q. Do you recollect who that banker was? - A. Ramsden, or some such thing, it was No. 57. I think, in some street, I forgot what; Hammersley, or some such thing, if I was to hear it I can tell.

Q. Was it in St. James's-street, or the Hay-market, or Pall-mall? - A. In Pall-mall, I think; I am not sure.

Q. You got the money for it? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you tell them your name? - A. Yes; they asked me, and I told them the name on the bill was not mine.

Q. How soon after your return from London did you go over to Monmouth? - A. Two days.

Q. Do you recollect what day you returned from Monmouth? - A. I don't.

Q. What day of the week? - A. I cannot say; I was to be with the will at such a time, at Monmouth of the Monday following, I think at eleven o'clock; but I could not go, and therefore it was some time first.

Q. What was it stopped you from going to Monmouth at that time? - A. I did not get from London in time.

Q. But how long after you reached Bath was it? I cannot recollect.

Q. Who did you go with? - A. One John Edwards.

Q. What did you go to Monmouth for? - A. With this said copy of a will.

Q. Did you carry it? - A. Yes.

Q. Who did you deliver it to? - A. One Mrs. Kane.

Q. When did you receive this money? - A. The 10l. was after the will was made.

Q.Were you in London after that? - A. Yes.

Q. Is it or not, the paper you carried to Monmouth? - A. It is.

Q.Look at that; is it the same paper you had from Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. This, my Lord, is the cover at I have now shewn the witness.

Q.Look at that, (the will), is that the same that was afterwards produced upon the trial at Hereford? - A. It is.

Cross-examined by Mr. Erskine. Q. I have been looking at you, and listening to you, for a great while, with profound admiration, and think I never saw a gentleman so much at his ease as you seem to be; perfectly tranquil and happy, are you not?

Court. You are not bound to answer that.

Q. Look across to the Jury; you did not know at all the deceased Henry Lewis ? - A. I did not know him.

Q. Then it is not true at all that you knew him about five years before 1791? - A. No.

Q. It is true that you swore that though? - A. I am very sorry I did.

Q. So I see; and you swore also, I believe, that he came to your house, and that the will was made at your house, and attested at your house, you are sorry for that too, I suppose? - A. I came into this Court, I wish to do justice, and to let the truth be known; I think it has nothing to do with the case.

Q. It has; and I shall apply to his Lordship to make you answer every question I ask. You did swear that? - A. Yes.

Q. With as much ease as you are swearing now the contrary; now, how am I to know, if what you were swearing then, or what you are swearing now, is the truth? - A. I came now to do the honest justice.

Q. Suppose I had been at Hereford, and was asking the question - whether you did not come to speak the truth, what would you have said; were you not asked that? - A. I likely might.

Q. Then your answer was, that you were come to speak the truth; was it so? - A. I cannot recollect.

Q.You know very well, after you had made that oath, you were commited for the forgery; that you were taken up, and sent to prison? - A. I know I was sent to prison, and am now.

Q. Now, how long after you had been in prison did you begin to tell the story you have been telling to-day? - A. Some time after.

Q. Then you had, some time after, confessed that you committed this forgery? - A. I had not.

Q. What do you call signing your name to a forged will; do you mean to swear you did not know you were guilty of a capital offence for having unered a will knowing it to be forged? - A. I did not know it then.

Q.Perhaps you don't think that wrong? - A. I don't think that was right.

Q. You don't think it a very wrong thing not for once or so. What do you think of the one that you did over now with the name of Lewis to it; do you think that a forgery? - A. I don't know; it might be a forgery.

Q. Do you mean to say, that when the blank paper was said to be old enough, as it was said by

Holland, and you were desired to copy it over the name of Lewis, you did not know it was a forgery? - A. I positively swear I did not know it was a forgery then; I did not think it right not withstanding.

Q. You practised as an attorney? - A. I was an auctioneer.

Q. Upon your oath, did you ever practise as an attorney? - A. I have been an attorney's clerk; I don't deny that.

Q. Upon your oath, did you not practise as an attorney, state yourself to be an attorney, and do business as an attorney? - A. I never stated myself as an attorney yet.

Q. Did you not practise as an attorney? - A. Not by myself.

Q. I will give you the names of a few causes, and see whether you practised in any of them: in Parry against Pyander; did you practise in that? - A. I had nothing to do with it.

Q. Do you mean to swear that? - A. I was not concerned in the business any more than the gentlemen here.

Q. You don't know any thing of it? - A. I served the process for the attorney, one Akerman.

Q. You were his clerk, were you? - A. No.

Q. How came you to serve the processes? - A. It was sent to Bath.

Q. Upon your oath, was not Akerman acting as your agent, in that very cause? - A. He positively was not.

Q. When you got into prison, you underwent an examination before Mr. Barrow, the Justice? - A. Yes.

Q. You had then a perfect recollection of all the circumstances that belong to this transaction? - A. I recollected some of them.

Q. Does your recollection get better after a long course of time? - A. I was at a nonplus.

Q. Had you not been two months in goal before you were examined? - A. It might be.

Q. Don't you know so? - A. I believe it was.

Q. You have told those gentlemen, all this abominable business you have been describing, was planned before you came to London, when Mr. Crossley was at Bath; that you took horses, and that Mr. Holland and Mr. Crossley rode together, and you and Austin together; that one went to Newton, and then to Linton; that strikes me as the most important part of the business, does not it you? - A. I cannot say; what I have said now, is, before God and man, positively true.

Q. How did it happen, that though the Magistrate has said it was read over to you deliberately, that you made erasures where you could not swear to it, that there is not one syllable of having seen Mr. Crossley at Bath? - A. Because there is a part of it told, and part not; there was not time to take it all down.

Q. Did you tell Mr. Barrow that circumstance? - A. I cannot tell.

Q. Will you swear you did not? - A. I don't mean to swear about it; I don't recollect.

Q. Do you mean to say, that when you were admitted an evidence for the Crown, that at that time you did not recollect? - A. I did not know I was to be admitted an evidence for the Crown at that time.

Q. Did you prosess to tell the truth to Mr. Barrow? - A. I did; but Mr. Barrow did not ask me, and I did not tell him; and there may be some more yet, perhaps, that was not put down.

Q. If I recollect you right, Mr. Holland, when at Bath, told you that would not do, for that Mr. Lewis was a very particular man? - A. I did not say so.

Q. Who said so? - A. I did not say so.

Q. What did you say? - A. Sir John Briggs told me so.

Q. Was it before, or after Mr. Crossley went to London? - A. Yes.

Q. So that this was managed before Mr. Crossley went to London? - A. Yes.

Q. And you have said nothing about it in your examination? - A. It was all managed before, I tell you.

Q. Were you ever asked, at the assizes, whether you had seen Mr. Crossley before; what did you answer to that? - A. I said I had.

Q. Did not you say, you only saw him once by accident, coming out of the King's-Bench? - A. I did not say that I had not seen him any more than that.

Q. Will you venture to swear that you did not? - A. To the best of my recollection, I did not swear that; I don't recollect any such thing.

Q. Will you venture to swear you did not? - A. I cannot; I am come here to tell the truth, I hope, and I will do it.

Q. Did you not say you saw him coming out of the King's-Bench, and that was the only time you ever saw him in your life? - A. I don't know that I did.

Q. Look at that examination; did you give an account to the magistrate of all you knew, and did he write it down? - A. I did not say I did.

Q.Did not you prosess to give an account of all you knew? - A. No, they did not ask me; I did not give every particular instruction, every word, that I knew of it.

Q. Did you tell the Magistrate that Mr. Crossley desired you to write that letter you sent to Mrs. Kane? - A. Mr. Crossley wrote that letter, and I copied it.

Q. Did you tell the Magistrate so? - A. I don't recollect.

Q. Do you believe you told him so? - A. I cannot tell.

Q.Suppose it should turn out that you did not tell him so, why did you not? - A. I cannot answer the question.

Q. I ask you, if you can account for not having told the Magistrate; supposing that when that comes to be read, you should not have told the Magistrate one syllable of having seen Mr. Crossley at Bath; how can you account for it? - A. I only described the heads of it, and this was left out, perhaps.

Q.Do you know Mr. Gray, the jailer? - A. Yes; I know him very well.

Q. Had you ever any conversations with him upon the subject of this? - A. Yes; previous to my giving this relation to Mr. Barrow.

Q. Did you give any previous information of what you have laid before the Court to-day? - A. Not in particular.

Q. Will you venture to swear you had no communication with him after that time? - A. I have talked to him several times, but not in particular.

Q.After Mr. Crossley was committed to prison, had you not conversed with the jailor, Mr. Gray? - A. I don't know but I might, several times, as he comes to lock me up in the evening.

Q. You don't recollect whether you had or not? - A. Not private conversation.

Q. Then I understand you to say, that, subsequent to the time of Mr. Crossley being committed, you never did speak to Mr. Gray upon the subject of Mr. Crossley being brought there? - A. Previous to the time of Mr. Crossley being brought there, I had said, to be sure, that the will was a good will, till I told Mr. Barrow the rights of it; and after that, if I did say any thing to the jailer, I certainly did say, that Mr. Crossley was concerned in it with Austin and me.

Q. So that after Mr. Crossley was committed, and after you had laid an information against Mr. Crossley, you said the same thing to the jailor that you had said in your information; that is to say, that Mr. Crossley was concerned with you? - A. Yes.

Q. You have never said the contrary since Mr. Crossley was committed? - A. I might have said, that Mr. Crossley was not the first person that pointed out the will to be made, because it was Mr. Holland.

Q. Did you not say to Mr. Gray, after Mr. Crossley was committed, that Mr. Crossley did not know certainly any thing of the will, but that you were obliged to swear to it? - A. No; never in my life.

Q. That you positively swear? - A. Yes; positively.

Q. I have now given you time to recollect yourself, and my Lord has got your answer down; now let us see how long you will stand by a thing, and in how short a time you will swear and unswear Mr. Gray asked you, whether Mr. Crossley had any knowledge of the will; and that you said Mr. Crossley did not know any thing of the will, but you were obliged to swear it; and upon being asked, how you could accuse Mr. Crossley, you said, that you, to your knowledge, could not possibly accuse Mr. Crossley of it? - A. I deny saying any such words to the jailor, or to that effect.

Q.Vastly well, sir; now I want just to see whether I have got the rest of your evidence correct; I shall trouble you with very few questions now; you went, at the desire of Sir John Briggs, to London, and Austin with you; you went to the Golden Cross; Austin went to the White Horse Cellar; you went to Mr. Crossley on the Sunday morning, and told him, that Sir John Briggs wanted to speak to him, &c. (repeats his evidence)? - A. There are words there that are wrong.

Q. In the morning you went first of all and saw Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes.

Q. You delivered your message from Sir John Briggs to Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes.

Q. And he gave you three guineas, or three guineas and a-half; now what time was that? - A. Monday morning, near twelve o'clock.

Q. And you asked him why he made two parts of the will; and he said, he made two parts of the will in case you should be detected, and Mr. Austin, at the trial; that he and his clerks might come and prove that an old gentleman left it with him; now that is a very remarkable expression, that must have struck pretty deep; it was not a thing one would hear and forget very much; did you tell that to the Magistrate? - A. I believe I did; I am not sure.

Q. You think you did? - A. I think I did; I think you will find it in the paper.

Q. Do you remember receiving this letter from Akerman, in which, he says, he is sorry to be informed, the public term me the notorious Jacob Isgar's agent; now, upon your oath, do you mean to say, you did not employ Akerman in any of the causes in that paper? - A. Only in my own; three or four of my own.

Q. Who was employed in those causes? - A. No attorney but Akerman.

Q. How comes Akerman to speak so in that letter? - A. Because one Wilmot sent it to him.


Examined by Mr. Mills. Q. Where do you live? - A. At Bath.

Q. Were you in Bath, in April last? - A. Yes.

Q.What are you? - A. I keep on the mealing-business.

Q. Do you know the Three Tuns, at Bath? - A. Yes.

Q. By whom is that kept? - A. By one Henry Ballinger.

Q.Look and see if you know the prisoner, Mr. Crossley? - A. Yes, I do.

Q. Do you know Jacob Isgar ? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see Jacob Isgar at the Three Tuns, in April last? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see Mr. Crossley there? - A. Yes.

Q. Were you there when any conversation passed between Mr. Crossley, him, and you? - A. No further than (the 13th of April was a Monday) Mr. Crossley called at my house, between twelve and one o'clock; he left word for me to go to the Three Tuns; I went there, and there was a bowl of punch upon the table; I asked Mr. Crossley how he came down there; he said, he was going upon business to Gloucester, and round there; he asked me for some money that I borrowed, in London, of him; he asked me to pay him that, which I did, we sat down and drank a glass or two of punch together, and presently in came Isgar; and Mr. Crossley said, will you be bound for Isgar, for what he owes me; I said, no; I was bound too much already.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. You are a merchant at Bath? - A. I have been.

Q. In what commodities? - A. In wheat and flour.

Q. In different sort of things; have you not a good many people in your house? - A. No.

Q. You have left off that business; have you no lodgers in your house? - A. No.

Q.How long have you ceased to have any? - A. Two or three months.

Q. You have no dislike to Mr. Crossley? - A. No.

Q. You never expressed any displeasure or resentment at Mr. Crossley, or use any expression of illwill with respect to him? - A. Not that I know of.

Q.Look at those gentlemen, and tell me, if you mean to abide by it? - A. When I heard of his being taken up, I said, he had not used me well.

Q.Nothing more violent than that? - A. Nothing that I know of.

Q.Should you recollect your own expressions, if you were to hear them again? - A. I dare say I might.

Q. Did you ever say you would sport an hundred to hang him? - A. I never did that I know of.

Q. I will put you in possession of a remarkable expression that accompanied it; that if it was necessary, you would be the hangman? - A. I might say so.

Q. Upon your oath did not you say so? - A. I don't know but I might.

Q. Did you not say it? - A. I might.

Q. That won't do for me? - A. I might say, if nobody else would hang him, I would, or something of that sort.

Q.And that you would sport an hundred to hang him? - A. I have no hundreds to sport.

Q. Upon your oath did not you use that expression; your memory is not remarkably short; upon your oath, did not you say so when you were before the Grand Jury? - A. No.

Q. Were you ever at Clerkenwell? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you not, upon that occasion, use these very expressions; look at those gentlemen; cannot you look an honest man in the face; upon your oath, when you were subpoened upon that occasion to Clerkenwell, did you not say you would sport an hundred to hang him; and you would be the hangman yourself, if it was necessary, and nobody would hang him, you would be the hangman? - A. I might the latter part of it.

Q. You have no resentment to Mr. Crossley? - A. I have been very much injured by him.

Q. Upon your oath, since he has been in custody, have you not been arrested for a debt of 170l. at his suit? - A. Yes.

Q. Have you compounded that debt? - A. No.

Q. Have you settled it? - A. I gave him 50l. in Hereford gaol for it.

Q. Is it since that that you made use of these bitter expressions? - A. There was not that money due to him.

Q. I like that; so much the better; there was nothing coming to him? - A. I believe he is in my debt a good deal.

Q. And since he has been in custody you have made use of these expressions respecting him? - A. I may as far as I know.


Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. Does your husband keep the Three Tuns, at Bath? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see the prisoner at your house, at Bath? - A. I don't recollect the gentleman's face, if the gentleman in black is the prisoner.

Q. Do you recollect having seen him before? - A. I do not recollect that I ever have.

Q. Do you remember Isgar being at your house? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember Austin's being there? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know at what time they were at your

house? - A. I believe it was the 4th of April that he was there; the gentleman that Isgar waited on.

Q. Do you recollect whether that gentleman, or Isgar, or either of them, went out of town on horseback? - A. I have heard so from our hostler.

Q. Is he here? - A. No; I heard that there were horses had.


Examined by Mr. Dauntey. I am a hackneyman, at Bath.

Q. Do you let horses there? - A. Yes; in Crown-street.

Q. Do you know the person of Jacob Isgar ? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know the person of William Austin ? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you recollect at any time letting horses to Isgar? - A. Yes.

Q. At what time was that? - A. I believe the 11th day, I have got the book about me.

Q. Was the entry made at the time? - A. Yes; my wife makes the entry when I am not at home; but I saw the horses go out.

Q. See the day on which these horses were lett? - A. On the 11th day of April last.

Q. Did you, on the day that entry refers to, see Austin and Isgar upon those horses? - A. I did.

Q.What was the hire that you received for those horses? - A. Six shillings.

Q. Was it one day, or two? - A. They returned the same day, in about two hours and an half.

Q. Did you see the entry the same day? - A. Yes; I took the money of Isgar for both the horses.

Q. Did you know the place to which they were to go? - A. To Newton.

Q. How do you know that? - A. They hired them there; if it is for a day, I ask where they are going; if they go for longer, I cannot pretend to say; they told me they were going no farther than Newton.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. You keep the Globe, at Newton? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you keep it in April, last year? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Jacob Isgar? - A. Yes, when I see him; I remember seeing him there have a glass of punch along with another man.

Q. Do you know who he came with? - A. I cannot say.

Q. Did he come on horseback? - A. I don't know; I came in while he was there.

Q. Do you know whether he had any thing to do with other people in the house? - A. I don't know, only from the servant maid.

Q. Did you see them at any time in company with any other person in at your house? - A. No; I did not.

Court. Q. You say you saw Isgar at your house, you cannot recollect when, can you recollect the month? - A. I cannot say to a quarter of a year, that I know of.

Q. Do you know whether it was summer, or spring, or winter? - A. I cannot say I do.

Q.Nor any person that he met at your house? - A. Not one person.


Examined by Mr. Sergeant Adair. Q. Do you know Isgar? - A. Very well.

Q. Did he ever lodge at your house, when in town? - A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell me when he was in town in the course of the last year? - A. Yes; he came to town in the month of February.

Q. Do you remember his being in town any time after that? - A. Yes; he came to town after that, the 26th of April.

Q. Do you recollect what day he went out of town again? - A. Yes; on the Saturday following, the first of May.

Q. Are you sure it was on a Saturday? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember whether he went out in the morning or evening? - A. In the evening; he went by the six o'clock stage from the Bull and Mouth.

Q. Do you recollect any person being with him when he was in town? - A. A person came to town with him, but did not lodge at my house with him; it is a person that I have since heard called Austin.

Q. How long did he stay in town? - A. I cannot say; he slept one or two nights, I cannot be certain which; my wife and I know that he did one, but don't know whether it was two or not.

Q. Do you know the prisoner, Mr. Crossley? - A. Perfectly well.

Q. Did you ever see him with Austin? - A. I have seen him with Isgar a score times, I believe.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow. Q. And I believe one of those times was to arrest him? - A. He was arrested at Mr. Crossley's suit.

Q. Do you remember saying that you did not like to see Mr. Crossley there, for he always came to give some trouble to lodgers? - A. I don't recollect.

Q. Which of the times that Isgar was in town was it that he was arrested at Mr. Crossley's suit? - A. The second time, on a Saturday evening.

Q. He complained of being taken on Saturday evening? - A. I did not hear him complain.

Q. You don't know the sum I suppose? - A. No.

Q. Did you know there was an attachment against him? - A. I did not.

Court. You say you have seen Mr. Crossley many times with Isgar at your house? - A. I have.

Q. Do you recollect whether you saw him there in the month of April, 1795? - A. I did.

Q. You have told us of a person came to town with Isgar, whose name you don't know? - A. He went by the name of William Austin .

Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Crossley with Isgar and Austin, all three together? - A. I never did.


Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. You were clerk in the house of Morland and Hammersley, in June last? - A. Yes.

Q. Be so good as look in your book, and see if in the month of June last you paid a draft of Mr. Crossley's, either of 10l. or ten guineas, and to whom? - A. I paid one of 10l. on the 10th of June, to a person of the name of Escar, or some such name; I took it from the person who received it.

Prisoner. Who was it made payable to? - A. Thompson, or bearer.

Q. Mr. Crossley kept cash with you sometime, I believe? - A. Yes.

Q.Do you know his hand-writing? - A. I believe I do.

Q. Look at that, and tell us if you believe that to be Mr. Crossley's hand-writing? - A. I cannot swear that it is.

Q. Do you believe it to be? - A. I really cannot tell.

Court. Have you seen Mr. Crossley's handwriting? - A: Yes, I have.

Q. What is your opinion about it? - A. I cannot exactly say.


Examined by Mr. Russell. Q. Did you ever see Mr. Crossley write? - A. Yes, I have.

Q.Look at these letters, and see if you believe any of them to be Mr. Crossley's hand-writing? - A. That is, I believe: the body of this, another, is not, but I think the signature is. Another; this is Mr. Crossley's, the whole of it. Another; I think the signature only of that is Mr. Crossley's writing. Another; this, I think, is all Mr. Crossley's. Another; this is, I think, Mr. Crossley's. Another; this I think is Mr. Crossley's. Another; this I think is Mr. Crossley's, but I am doubtful about this part of it, "keep all my letters till I see you."

Q. Look at the top entry in that page? - A. I believe this is his writing; (reads) "Friday, 1st May, 1795, Mr. Isgar at suit Rex. To Isgar, 2 guineas, and before, 3l. 13s. 6d.;" reads another entry,

"paid Mr. Price 2l. 2l." I think that is Mr. Crossley's writing.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. This, my Lord, is Mr. Mr. Crossley's own book, found in his house.

(Shews him another book). Look at that? - A. I dont't think any part of this is Mr. Crossley's hand-writing.

Q. There is another entry there, 1st of April; it seems to be the entry of the payment of a bill; whose hand-writing is it? - A. It does not appear to me to be Mr. Crossley's.

(Shews him another book). A. From the words Richard Holland , down to the bottom, is, I think, Mr. Crossley's writing.


Examined by Mr. Dauncey. Q. Look at that,(a notice of bail); is that your name at the bottom of the note? - A. Yes; I put in this bail.

Q. What is the title of the cause? - A. The King, and Jacob Isgar ; Mr. Isgar and Mr. Crossley were together, and applied to me to put in that bail.

Q. When was that? - A. The 29th of April.

Q.State what passed? - A. Mr. Crossley said, there was a person from Bath, that he wished to have bail put in to answer-interrogatories.

Court. Q. Isgar was with him? - A. Yes; he asked me if I had any objection to put in bail for Isgar.

Q.Was bail put in for him upon that applition? - A. Yes.

Q. On what day was the bail perfected? - A. Upon the 29th of April, 1795; there was no objection to them.

Q.Look at the copy of the bail bond, and see if that corresponds? - A. They are the same bail.

Q. Who paid you for it? - A. Mr. Crossley.

Q. What was the sum that he paid you? - A. Two guineas.


Examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Where do you live? - A. At Monmouth; I am a sheriff's-officer.

Q. Did you at any time go with a search warrant to the house of Richard Holland? - A. I did, with the elder Weaver and an officer; his house is in the parish of Stanford and Grisford, eight or nine miles from Monmouth, I will not be particular.

Q. Did you find any papers in that house? - A. I did.

Q.What did you do with those papers? - A. I gave them all to Mr. Phillips, the town-clerk, except one which I gave to Mr. Stokes.

Q. Do you know any person of the name of Vincent? - A. I know a man who went by the name of Vincent, we met that morning as we were going to search the house, a little man, with a fresh colour, told us his name was Vincent.

Q.Do you know, of your own knowledge,

whether that man is an acquaintance of Mr. Holland's, or not? - A. He told me he was.

Q.Is that the only knowledge you have of him? - A. We met him as I was going to the house, and he returned with us.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. This is a letter in Mr. Crossley's hand-writing, found at Mr. Holland's. (The Clerk reads).

Addressed to Mr. Richard Holland , to be left at the Lamb Inn, Abergavenny, Wales.


"There is a letter in the Post-office, at Abergavenny, by this post, directed to John Montague , Esq. Post-office, Abergavenny; be so good as to take it, and he will come by your house, then give him it; the New Bank will very soon open, &c.

I am, your's, &c.


London, 2d May, addressed to John Montague , Esq. Post-office, Abergavenny.


"When I saw Sir John Scott here, he then advised, and it was agreed that Mr. John Eberno should be at the King's head, on Monday, at eleven; I have since then settled the matter of Eberno, which Mrs. Allen last wrote about, and the bail was put in, so that nothing can, but his own want of prudence, prevent his attending to the appointment; he see off by the coach at four this morning, and has faithfully promised to keep his appointment. I hope Sir John will not fail to meet him, that he may at once dispatch his business; for he is much too apt to get drunk, and the sooner he returns the better; for I cannot answer for his prudence, if in liquor; and when any thing pleases or displeases Mr. Eberno, he is generally drunk on the subject. I am well satisfied you may trust him, as he will faithfully bring the money to account; so that you need not fear him on that head; but a man that gets drunk, is not a fit person for business, and therefore I would have you to act more cautiously, in future; the 50l. you gave him last is accepted; and I told him where to have the cash, and he had it, the full 50l.; and Sir John Scott desired me to advance him five guineas, as it is best to keep no accounts but what are clear. Mrs. Allen has a desire you will write her fully on the business, and how it is managed, and what is done (that she may know her money is properly laid out). You must be prudent and diligent in the business, and there is no doubt of success, the security is so good, and so very perfect the title, that no one can miss of approving the matter; so that there need no begging the question; and if the money is not advanced, on the security, when Mr. Eberno brings it, it may be got elsewhere - so I would have Sir John Scott told when you see him. Pray any compliments to our friends; and, I think, if Sir John comes into your part this summer, you may shew him this; he will the better understand how to act; and as I have, when I saw him, told him the whole truth of the case, I am satisfied he has too much understanding not to see it is right; besides, as he is in the habits of approving titles, he must be better and more perfectly satisfied by an open behaviour and disclosure of the full truth, than by any thing kojt back. I hope Mr. Eberno will not be kept an hour at the King's-head, as I have given him orders to depart as soon as possible. I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant.


Mr. Sergeant Adair. We shall now read a paper found at Mr. Holland's; the drase of the will in Isgar's handwriting. The will read,(Copied verbatim).

"In the Name of God Amen I Henry Lewis of the"of the Parish of Treleck in the County of Monmouth"Clark being of sound mind and memory and being"desirous to settle my Worldly affairs Do make this"my last Will and Testement in manner and form fol-"lowing that is to say I give unto my Kinswoman Mrs." Mary Kane of Monmouth Widow one half part of"all my Estates of what nature or kind soever and"wheresoever the same may be found or be situated"which I may be interested or entitled unto at the time"of my decease for and during her natural life and"after her decease I give the same before mentioned"half part of the said Estates unto her daughter Francis"Teresa Brigges and her Hires and Assigns forever"subject to payment of such Legacies hereinafter men-"tioned and paying thereout the sum of Two thousam"pounds after the deceas of Mrs. of Mrs. Mary Kane"their mother to Mary Kane and Grace Kane equally"to be divided between them share and share alike"I all so give Ten pounds per anum to each of my"Cousins Maria Williams and Grace Cornish of Bristol."to be paid them out of my Estates during their na-"tural lives I give unto Mrs. Susannah Harman of"Bristol the sum of five hundred pounds to be paid her"out of my Estates twelve months after my decease"I give unto Francis Rumsey of Treleck the sum of"five hundred pounds to be paid out of my decease"I give upto Francis Rumsey of Treteck the sum of"five hundred pounds to be paid out of my Estates at"Twelve Months after my decease. I give unto"Mrs. Kane aforesaid Widow and Francis Teresa Briggs"aforesaid all my Goods Chattels Plate Linning Chinia"Bonds Bills and personal Estates wheresoever charge-"able with my debts and funeral Expencies And I do"appoint the them my Executrix of this my last Will"and Testament and do hereby revoke all former Wills"by me made in Witness whereof I the said Henry"Lewis Hath hereunto sett my hand and Seal this 27th"day of July 1791.

"Sined sealed and delivared by"the said Henry Lewis the"Testator as for his Last"Will and Testment in the"presence of us who at his"request and in his presince"have subscribed our names"as Witness Heneunto. Henry Lewis Henry Henry H Henn Lew Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Lewis L Henry Henry Lewis . g. J Henry Lewis .

Mr. Sergeant Adair. The next piece of evidence is the 100l. note found in Austin's hat. (It is read).

London, 12th Dec. 1794.

Six months after date, I promise to pay James Smith the sum of an hundred pounds value received.

R. Holland,

Nando's Coffee house, Fleet-street.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Now, my Lord, it is necessary to point out to your Lordship and the Jury, what appears upon the inspection of that; when it is examined, the 94 appears originally to have been 95; for the truth of that observation, I must appeal to the eye sight of the Jury and the Court, and that bearer is struck out, and James Smith put in.

Mr. Sergeant Adair. The next is a letter addressed to Mr. Crossley from Clarke, 6th March, 1795, in which he speaks of the good old paper that he has by him, signed William Clarke , dated Worksop, 6th March, 1795. addressed Mr. Crossley, Adelphi, London.

"DEAR SIR,"I have got you four deed stamps, which are all I can get here; I cannot find a 15s. bond stamp, as I promised; they are all on one

stamp, and a figure of three upon it, which I think would not do; shall be going shortly to another place, and will try there; and hen got, send it you; or an old sheet may be stamped; I have me choice paper forty years old. I have no doubt but Mr. Bill stand mark; Mr. John Urton , I know, would do any thing you sopose; Tell me, and I'll fix it properly; I think, Mr. Urton ill not live long; I suppose I shall be his executor.

"Old I' - hath sent nothing; therefore I can do nothing of what were talking about. I shall put in our answers to interrogatories, Monday, (Mr. Clay attend). I have seen G. R - k - vs, afterday; he comes to crave my favours and forgiveness; he is ped of Robin Hooding , and abuses young Jonathan Wilde much, but is R. H. and he says he was a villian to cheat me; you will be what return in so little a time; I have forgiven him, and he must now be quite white-washed."

Another Letter read, dated 25th May, 1795, signed W. Clarke, and addressed to Mr. Crossley. Attorney at Law, Adelphi, London.


"I have received your letter last post; it is not convenient, at this me, to come to London to meet Mr. Dixcy, as I am not well, and noble, at present, to take so long a journey. I want much to go Leicester; I must go there next week. I hope Dixcy hath got is accounts allowed before the Master (I suppose 2000l.)

"I have sent Dixcy a jobber, a man of judgment and money; he ath set off to Dixcy's house well mounted, by way of Worcester; suppose he will be there some day this week; he comes to take view, and see situation, before he fixes; his name is Vincent; I hope he will find Richard at home, and that all things will be made greeable to them both. If Richard should come to London this week, he must hasten back to see the merchant; he will go to the King's-head, Monmouth, and send over for Richard.

"We have a great miss here; you may tell Richard, Old Nick went over to Worksop manor last night, and took his old acquaintnce, Wake; he was an idle devil not to fetch him ten years ago; he also fetched, last week, Briggs Rotherham, the Justice of Drauseld - they will make a good hroil together.

"I have both seen and sent to Gillet's brother, to do something or him, and have had a deal of trouble about it; they have put off o consider from time to time, &c.; I sent again yesterday; his brother Thomas seems to be now most forward to assist him, and promises to come to me here on Wednesday next; I will do all I can o serve the poor man, you may depend upon it; and I will write o him as soon as I know what will be done; I will do my best for his interest."

Mr. Sergeant Adair. Your Lordship fees, in that leter, there is mention made of Richard and of Vincent.

A Letter dated the 29th May, 1795, signed G.C. addressed to Mr. R. Holland, Skinsreth, the Lamb Inn, Abergavenny,(read),


"The last letter I had, told me of your intended journey to London; but I have not heard or seen you since; I came from the country today, and think there is a house, at Wickham, might suit one of the company, but wish to advise you on it.

"I had a letter from Mr. Clarke, in which he says, he has sent a Mr. Vincent to you; be careful what you do; but fail not to let me hear from you; if I do not see you, remember I stopped the writings till you came.

"Let me hear by return of post. Adieu."

Mr. Sergeant Adair. This is a draft to Mr. Crossley' and found at Mr. Crossley's, signed W. Cl-k, 13th Sept. 1795, addressed Mr. Crossley, John's street, Adelphi, London, (read).


"I have received your's; I am sorry Dixon's sample is found; what a fool must he be to write so many names, as you say he hath done; you may be certain, it is all his own doing. I have had no letter-Vincent called here when I was with you; he said he should call again before he went back into the West, but hath not yet done so; when he comes, I suppose I shall be acquainted with the whole history. I have seen the party which I told you I would; I have every reason to think I can get it; but you know there is no promising, certainly now, till you have the sum in hand. I have told you, I would do every think I could to serve you, and he assured I will; I hope I can do it shortly; but remember, I have never said absolutely I could do it; you know I told you how I was situated; I'll do my best, and hope I shall be able to oblige you; but don't depend upon it till you have it hand. Your's,

" W. Cl-K."

Mr. Sergeant Adair. The next is, Mr. Crossley's letter to Mr. Holland; 4th April, 1795, signed G. Crossley, Adelphi, 4th April, 1795; no address; (read).


"I received your remittance on account of Bataille, 57l. 10l. for which I am obliged; I will meet you at Gloucester at eight o'clock on Thursday morning, at the King's-head inn, there I shall come by the coach from the Bolt-in-Tun; I wish you to write for the 50l. bill back, it can be of no use to the party, and may be productive of much evil, as the gentleman you sent it to can do nothing with it, and he has not a single connexion, but what knows the person on whom it is drawn; if you had set your head at work to rain the concern, you could not have done it more effectually than by this chance business. I wish I may see you before your other affairs are to ripe. I wish the meeting had been nearer Bath. I shall bring hills with me such as you may want, and let me have all you can in return, and we will finally settle what is to be done. You will have a long letter of yesterday's date; observe the contents, and by no means fail to meet me at Gloucester, on Thursday morning, when the coach come, in, which is at eight o'clock."

Another Letter signed George Crossley , London, 11th May, 1795' addressed to Mr. Richard Holland , Skinsreth, Abergaveney'(read).


"I was much hurt till I had your letter of this date; it has cased my mind much, as t