Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 08 August 2022), February 1767, trial of Peter M'Cay (t17670218-35).

Peter M'Cay, Deception > forgery, 18th February 1767.

169. (M.) Peter M'Cay was indicted for uttering and publishing, as true, a promissory note, with the name George Bowes thereunto subscribed, dated Jan. 13. 1767, for the payment of 10 l. with intent to defraud Andrew Rogers , Jan. 16 . +

Andrew Rogers . I am a victualler , and live in Bow-street, Westminster ; the prisoner offered me a 10 l. note for cash; I supposed him to be a little in liquor, told him I could not change it.

Q. When was this?

Rogers. It was about six weeks ago; he had no money upon it; (a note produced, he takes it in his hand) it was to the same purport as this, but I am not positive that this is the same.

William Salthouse . I am servant to Mr. George Wild , a salesman in High Holbourn; on the 2d of January, about three in the afternoon, one Thomas Barber came to my master's shop and bought a coat; he talked in the Scotch language, I could hardly understand him; I said, we do not give credit; he produced this note; before I opened it, I asked him how he came by it, and whether any body had indorsed it to him; he said, no: he blushed very much; he appeared to be a country hed young fellow, not acquainted with business; I looked, and saw an indorsement upon it, I thought it was a forged hand; it seemed to be wrote with the side of the pen; I saw it was payable at Sir Charles Asgill 's; I said he must go along with me to Sir Charles's; it being a very wet day, he begged to stay till I came back; I said if it was a good note, I would give him change; he staid at my master's shop; I went, and Sir Charles Asgill 's clerk told me it was good for nothing, and asked me if I had delivered any goods upon it; I said, no; when I returned back the man was in the shop; I told him he must go along with me to Sir John Fielding , for it was a false note; we went; he produced certificates that he had served some gentlemen; we called in several neighbours to to know what should be done; my master thought proper to let him go, on his promising to produce the man that he had it of; we kept the note. On the Saturday following, in the evening, this Thomas Barber gave us information where we might see the prisoner at the bar; we went with him; he charged the prisoner with having received the note of him; on the Sunday morning we had a hearing before Sir John Fielding ; Sir John thought proper to commit the prisoner, and discharged Barber to be an evidence, and bound him over to appear here, but what is become of him I do not know; he has neither attended at Hick's Hall nor here.

Q. Do you know any thing of this being in the prisoner's custody.

Salthouse. No, I do not.

Barber was called upon his recognizance, but did not appear.

Acquitted .

His recognizance was ordered to be estreated.