Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 21 October 2020), September 1771, trial of Edward Burch Matthew Martin (t17710911-64).

Edward Burch, Matthew Martin, Deception > forgery, 11th September 1771.

610, 611. (M.) Edward Burch , and Matthew Martin , were indicted for feloniously forging a certain paper writing with the seal thereto affixed, purporting to be the last will and testament of Sir Andrew Chadwick , deceased, and to be signed by the said Sir Andrew Chadwick in his life time; with the name A. Chadwick, and to be sealed and directed by the said Sir Andrew Chadwick , in his life time; as and for his last will and testament, on the 5th of August last at St. James's, Westminster; with an intent to defraud Sarah Law , widow , of the messuages and tenements, with the appurtenances, against the statute, &c.

2d Count for feloniously uttering and publishing the same will, knowing the same to have been forged with the like intent, against the statute, &c.

3d Count for feloniously willingly acting and assisting, in the making, forging, and counterfeiting, the same will, with the like intent against the statute, &c.

4th Count for feloniously uttering, and publishing the same will, by which said forged will, the said Sir Andrew Chadwick , by which said will, is supposed to have been devised, amongst other things, the residue of his real and personal estate to his wife Margaret, Lady Chadwick, and her heirs for ever; with intent to defraud the persons who would become entitled to Sir Andrew Chadwick 's real estate, after his decease, knowing the same to have been forged against the statute, &c. *

( The witnesses were examined apart.)

John Leigh . This will was produced at Sir John Fielding 's, by Mrs. Glover.

Brooks. This pedigree was produced by Mr. Brown who appeared there as attorney for Burch; and Burch acknowledged that he had given it into Mr. Brown's hand; the pedigree was produced to shew the similitude of hands between the signing of that and the will. Martin was present, but he said nothing; Burch said, he found the pedigree among the papers were the will was, and that he indented one corner that he might know where he had it from.

Cross Examination.

Q. Did you make any mark upon the will?

Brooks. No; it has never been out of my custody.

Q. Do you know how Bruch and Martin came before Sir John?

Brooks. When an application was made to Sir John, he thought it would be proper to summons Mr. Lloyd to give evidence how he came by it; as it was said that he gave it to Mrs. Glover; he accordingly on Friday came to our office, and brought with him Burch and Martin; who, he said, gave him the will.

Q. Did they come voluntarily along with him?

Brooks. Yes; they came with him.

Council for the Crown. Did they mention how long this will and pedigree had been found?

Brooks. They did mention the time, but I do not recollect it; it was a small time ago; he said, he saw the will first three months before that time, at Mrs. Brooks's; that it was found among a bundle of papers then in the custody of Mrs. Brooks.

Q. from Burch. You said I gave the will to Mr. Brown, I produced it myself in the office?

Brooks. I am told by Mr. Brown that he did produce it; whether he gave it him in the office or no, I cannot tell.

Q. from Burch. Were we not at the office on Thursday?

Brooks. Yes; and I advised them to come again on Friday morning according to the summons.

John Lloyd . I live in New-street, near Carnaby market; I have been acquainted with Burch a twelvemonth or two, with Martin about three months; I have done a good deal of business for Sir Andrew Chadwick.

Council for the Crown. Inform the court and jury what application was made to you by the prisoners.

Lloyd. About four months ago, Mr. Burch told me there were some papers of consequence relating to Sir Andrew Chadwick's estate; I asked him what they consisted of; he did not choose to tell me of what nature they were; Martin was not present, he desired I would apply to Mr. Thomas Hudson , and tell him of these papers of consequence, that he might see them if he pleased. Mr. Hudson was the agent concerned for the heir at law; I told Mr. Hudson of it; he desired the men to come to his chambers; Mr. Burch reported that he was not possessed of them, but that they were in the hands of Martin; I acquainted Burch and Martin of it, neither of them chose to go; Martin said he did not choose to go; they met me at the Fountain in Broad-street; they took me into the passage; I said, I had spoke to Mr. Hudson; Martin said, I mentioned the matter to you, and I shall not go; and I heard no more of it for two months, till at last Burch came and informed me the papers consisted of a will made in favour of Lady Chadwick.

Q. How came he to apply to you; are you any relation to Lady Chadwick?

Lloyd. None; I have let the houses, and have been a sort of an agent for Sir Andrew; have taken schedules of fixtures and the like; I was an agent to Mr. Hudson at this time.

Q. Had they at that time mentioned what the papers were?

Lloyd. No; they only said they were papers of consequence.

Q. Was Martin present when Burch said the papers consisted of a will?

Lloyd. No; he said that every shilling of rent that was paid to Mrs. Law, was paid to Lady Chadwick's wrong; I said, then if you are possessed of these papers of this consequence, why in the name of God do not you bring them forth; I will, says he, next Friday; they were to be brought to the Fountain; I attended there, they did not come; I think it was next morning that Burch said he would bring them; on Monday morning Burch came up to the Fountain; he asked me if Martin had been there; I said, no; he said will you take a walk with me; I asked him where; he said towards the Seven Dials; I went with him into Grafton-street, he desired me to go into a public house, I think the sign of the Bear, and to wait till Martin came; I went into the house and called for six-penny worth of brandy and water, and sat in a box in the window; I looked out at the window to see where Burch went to; he went into a house next door to an ironmonger's; he came back and told me that Mr. Martin was not come; then I said, we may as well go up again to the Fountain; and leave word here; before we had drank out the six-penny worth, I saw Martin go by; I said, there is the little man; Burch called him in; he had a bundle under his arm, in a canvas bag, tied up in a silk handkerchief; Martin said, here is the very thing; upon which I said, we had better go up to the Fountain and look at it; we went there, and there the parcel was opened in the one pair of stairs fore room; Martin took a paper out of the parcel and gave it me to read, which one of them said, was Sir Andrew Chadwick 's will; it appeared to be dated in 1764; I just took a cursory view of it; I had not time to read it; out of the same parcel Martin produced another will dated in 1762, and said, this is the will you are to carry over the way to Lady Chadwick's; she lives opposite; (a paper shewn him,) this is the will.

Q. How do you know it?

Lloyd. As near as I can bear in memory.

Q. Did they give any reason why this will and not that dated 1764, was to be took over the way?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Did you see the will in 1764?

Lloyd. Yes; I took a cursory view of it; it had the same witnesses to it as this; they were in the same order; Field and Grove.

Q. Did you read any part of the contents of that will?

Lloyd. I did read some part; there was a clause whereby after Lady Chadwick's death, he gave the real estate to the Chadwicks in Ireland.

Q. Your knowledge of the world in general must give you to know that the will in 1764, was a revocation of the will in 1762?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. And yet Martin told you that that was the will you was to carry over the way?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Had you any curiosity to enquire further after the will in 1764?

Lloyd. I asked what was become of it; and did not know till I came to sir John Fielding 's that the will was destroyed.

Q. Was the will of 1764 enquired after at sir John's?

Lloyd. Yes; and the rest of the papers; Mrs. Brooks said she had burnt them; the prisoners were then in the next room.

Q. Did they give any account of what became of the papers and will of 1764?

Lloyd. I do not know that the question was asked them; sir John Fielding sent some people to search the house, to see if it was destroyed or not; they put the will of 1764 into their bundle again. They said, if lady Chadwick reaped any benefit from this will, they expected to be rewarded; as to any sum it was not mentioned.

Q. Who said that?

Lloyd. I believe it was Martin; Burch said that the Chadwicks had given 4000 l. notes for these papers, eight five hundred pound notes of hand, payable on demand.

Q. That the Chadwicks had given him these notes?

Lloyd. Yes; and they were in Burch's possession. I believe that Martin witnessed the bills, for I fancy neither of the Chandwicks could write.

Q. Was it at that time said they expected to be rewarded?

Lloyd. No; I believe a week before the will was produced; Martin was by at that time.

Q. Whether something was said about so many years rent?

Court. Was any thing said about who was to receive the rent, in case this will prevailed?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Had you ever any conversation with them before Mrs. Glover?

Lloyd. The day the will was produced, the 5th of August, Martin and I went over to Mrs. Glover: when we came there, Mr. Hulse, Mrs. Glover's attorney, interrogated Mr. Martin how he came by this paper. Mrs. Glover lives with Lady Chadwicks. He asked him who he was, and what he was, and where he lived. He told him where he did live, which I did not know till that time, and that he had that paper from Mrs. Brooks, among a parcel of other papers. Mr. Hulse desired him to attend next morning at his chambers, and bring the woman with him.

Q. Was the will produced to Mr. Hulse at that time?

Lloyd. Yes; and I think he looked at it; Martin, Burch, and the woman went to Mr. Hulse's chambers; there was Mr. Rose and Mr. Vaughan; I don't know what business he had there, he is a cabinet maker. Mr. Hulse was questioning Martin and Brooks, and in came Mr. Blake, and asked where I had that will from; I said from Martin; he was sitting in the room then; he asked me if I had any objection to go before sir John Fielding ; I told him no; I would go then or any other time. He said he would send for Mr. Hudson; he went away to open his commission at Joe's coffee-house, Mitre-court; he was gone three quarters of an hour; he came back, and said we need not attend at sir John Fielding 's that day; that he would give us notice, this was on Wednesday, and, I think, on Thursday I received a notice to attend on sir John Fielding on the Friday; I did attend accordingly.

Q. Was you present with Mrs. Glover and Martin?

Lloyd. Yes; that one time.

Q. Was any thing then said about a reward?

Lloyd. Not a syllable.

Q. Was Mrs. Glover present at these times?

Lloyd. I believe she was at Mr. Hulse's, but not in the room.

Q. Do you remember any thing of the pedigree?

Lloyd. One Sunday evening I called at the Horse and Groom in Theobald's-row; I believe a fortnight or three weeks before the will was produced, Burch had promised to raise a man, in low circumstances, twenty pound for a year; I thought I would become security for this debt of twenty pounds, because it would give me some time to pay the money I had entered into security for him; his name is Kimber. I called on Burch on Sunday about it; we went to the Horse and Groom, in Theobald's row; he said, now I will shew you something; he went out of the room, and brought a paper or parchment in his hand; he doubled back the lower part, and said there, see that; do you know that hand writing; is that like sir Andrew Chadwick's hand writing? I said it looks like sir Andrew Chadwick 's, and I believe it is. I never had it in my hand; and, says he, as sir Andrew says, second thoughts are best, I won't shew it you to night; I said I want to know none of your secrets.

Q. Look at that paper, and see whether you can lay that is it or not?

Lloyd. I believe it is; I never saw it opened till I saw it before Sir John Fielding ; Kimber was present at this time.

Q. Did you ever hear Burch and Martin relate any thing of a quarrel with the Chadwicks?

Lloyd. They said the Chadwicks had used them very ill; this was about three weeks or a month before the will was produced; Burch said, he had had a quarrel with the Chadwicks, and that they had met him in St. Giles's and beat him.

Q. Did he say any thing what should be the consequence of the quarrel?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Do you know of any application being made for receipts to any body, by any of the prisoners?

Lloyd. Yes; by Burch, about a month before the will was produced; he told me that the last codicil of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's will, was a most extraordinary one; that there was a doubt whether it was not forged; that there was a bill in Chancery going to be filed against the sesiduary, legatee and the executor, that one Mr. Potts an attorney, who lives some where towards St. James's-street, was concerned; that they wanted these receipts that were known to be Sir Andrew's hand writing, to see if they tallied with that codicil; I fetched my file and he took of three receipts of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's, and took them away with him; he wanted a receipt with a good many figures; I had been Sir Andrew Chadwick's tenant many years.

Q. You said that four months ago, the rumour was spread of some papers of consequence being to be produced; and this was a month before the production of the will?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Then my question is; whether the application for these receipts, was after the begining of that four months, that you say the things was talked of; the papers being to produce?

Lloyd. Yes; it was after the commencement of that conversation.

Cross Examination.

Q. Pray do you know whether there were any figures in Sir Andrew's codicil, that was suspected?

Lloyd. No; He asked me for a receipt that had figures in it.

Q. You was agent to Mr. Hudson, who is concerned for the heir at law; whoever it may befor now, it is in dispute?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. The account they always gave you of this will was, that it was found among some papers, in a bundle at Mrs. Brookes's?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Did they ever pretend to say whether the will was Sir Andrew Chadwick 's will, or not?

Lloyd. They said it was a will of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's.

Q. How long did they say they had found it out?

Lloyd. About last Christmas.

Q. Did they ever pretend to you to know any thing more of the will, than that it was found among a bundle of papers?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Then the purpose for which this will was to be carried to Mrs. Glover's; the person that managed for Lady Chadwick, was to take their directions as to that?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. They did not say it was a good will or a bad one?

Lloyd. No; it was left to the consideration of Lady Chadwick, to know whether it was proper to produce the will or not; there was no talk whether it was a good or a bad will.

Q. They did not pretend to have any other knowledge of the will than what appeared on the face of it?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. You mentioned something about a will in 1764; are you pretty accurate as to the date of it?

Lloyd. I think it was 1764.

Q. You said just now that you had but a cursory view of that will?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. They said they expected some reward if Lady Chadwick got any benefit by this will, for finding of it?

Lloyd. They said they expected to be rewarded; I cannot say the very words.

Q. Did you give your opinion whether you thought the will good or bad?

Lloyd. I do not remember that I did; I asked them if I should carry it over the way, and they gave me leave; I said the signature was like Sir Andrew's.

Q. Did not you say, when it was put into your hands; I will swear the signing to be the hand writing of Sir Andrew?

Lloyd. I said I believed it was; but I could not say I will swear it.

Q. Did not you tell them that Sir Andrew had frequently told you in his life time, that you should be remembered in his will?

Lloyd. I did.

Q. I believe a legacy is given to you in this will?

Lloyd. Yes; there is.

Q. Did you tell them this before the will was produced?

Lloyd. No; at the time before it was carried over to Mrs. Glover.

Q. Did you give that as a reason to them why you apprehended the will might be the true will of Sir Andrew?

Lloyd. No; I do not remember that I did.

Council for the Crown. Was there no conversation prior to producing this will, with regard to Sir Andrew's good intentions to you?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Whether you will take upon you to say that this expression, that Sir Andrew meant to consider you in his will was at that time, or before the will was produced?

Lloyd. I think it was at the time.

Q. Can you remember what was due from you to Sir Andrew, about the third of July 1762?

Lloyd. I believe the account was nearly a balance.

Q. You say you saw this other will so as to distinguish they were the same witnesses; did you see any other papers of the bundle?

Lloyd. Yes; there were bills and proceedings in Chancery.

Q. Can you tell whether it is relating to Sir Andrew Chadwick or any other person?

Lloyd. There appeared to be one relating to Chadwick an attorney, and one relating to John Bignel ; I saw none at that time, that related to Sir Andrew; seeing them lie on the table, I read the heads of the bills, Sir Andrew was not a party to them; Burch picked these out of the parcel, and gave them to me, because there was the name of Chadwick to them, he said there is more of the Chadwicks names; that was Monday the 5th of August, ( these papers produced.)

Q. Do you remember Sir Andrew in 1762?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Was he not in good health at that time?

Lloyd. Yes; except now and then the gout.

Q. Where did it usually affect him mostly?

Lloyd. In his fingers.

Q. Do you know who this solicitor was; whose name is to many of these papers?

Lloyd. I know nothing at all of him.

Court. You said in your original examination, Martin produced a will of 1762, which he said, you was to carry over the way to Lady Chadwick; now did you ask, or he desire the will might be carried over?

Lloyd. I heard first of the will of 1764, Martin threw out the other paper, and said, that is the will you are to carry over the way.

Q. Then how came you to ask them leave?

Lloyd. After I had first read it; I said, well, may I carry this over the way; they said, yes.

Council for the Prisoner. There was an arrear of rent due to Sir Andrew at that time; the will has left him such arrears of rent, as may be due to Sir Andrew at the time of his decease?

Cross examined by the prisoner Burch.

Q. I desire you will answer me according to truth; long before ever I spoke to you of these wills, or the papers that I had possession of, had not we conversation about these whimsical, as you called them, codicils; and did not you say it was a matter of surprize to you, how these codicils were dated as they were?

Lloyd. At the time the last codicil was dated, in 1768, I was pretty sure Sir Andrew Chadwick could not write; he had the goat in his hand so bad that he could not hold a pen: I said so, and that Sir Andrew had put off taking rents, and the like; by saying he could not write a receipt.

Q. Did you not say the same to me?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. This was before I told you of the papers at all?

Lloyd. I believe it might; I cannot pretend to fix the exact time.

Court. Did the prisoner ever restore to you the three receipts?

Lloyd. Yes; I believe they are in the hands of Sir John Fielding .

Mr. Leigh. Here are the receipts, (producing them.

Lloyd. I believe these are the two receipts.

Q. Did you make any particular mark upon them?

Lloyd. No; these are receipts of Sir Andrew to me, for rent; at the time I gave him these receipts he told me he had some others.

Court. Here is a letter of George Chadwick 's, wherein he signifies himself your unfortunate brother; it is not directed to any body; do the gentlemen on either side know any thing of George Chadwick ?

Council for the Crown. We never heard of such a brother.

Council for the Prisoner. Where did he say these papers came from?

Lloyd. Burch took them out of the bag.

Council for the Prisoners. One of the papers is an office copy of an affidavit in 1741.

Court. Was Edward Knight , Andrew Knight , John Palmer , or Joshua Turner , any relations of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's?

Lloyd. No; neither of them as I know of.

Council for the Prisoner. Had you any promise of gratuity in case this will was aside?

Lloyd. No; none at all.

Q. Did not you say you thought the codicil was forged or antedated?

Lloyd. I said I suspected the last codicil dated in March, because I knew Sir Andrew could not write; I went to Doctors Commons on purpose to see that last codicil, it looked like his hand writing.

Q. Did not I tell you that there was a bill depending in chancery; because that codicil barred the family of 10,000 l.

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. I asked you for the receipts, did not I tell you I only wanted them to compare with the figures, and did not Mr. Martin give you the will of sixty-four?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Did not you read it all over verbatim?

Lloyd. Very well.

Q. Did not you make this animadversion when you read it over, he desired in that will to be buried at Cardy place in Lincolnshire, and he was to have a vault erected?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Did not you say that he had mentioned that in his life-time?

Lloyd. Yes; he told me he would be buried at Cardy-place; he had a family vault there; and I should be his undertaker.

Court to prisoners council. This will of 1764 is not now produced, I believe?

Council. I think not.

Q. After this was read over did not you say this is the thing, this is the very thing?

Lloyd. I do not remember that I did; I cannot remember my particular words.

Q. And further observed, you thought there was a mistake in one of the names, mentioned in the will?

Lloyd. I turned the leaf over again, and said, this will is not dated.

Q. You found a date?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. After that was read over did not Mr. Martin give you the other?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Did you read that over?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Did not you say this must be genuine; Sir Andrew has forgiven me an arrear of rent, which no mortal but himself could know of?

Lloyd. I do not know but I might say so.

Court. Was that the will of sixty-two?

Lloyd. Yes; Sir Andrew always told me he would remember me when he died.

Q. And that no man knew you owed money to Sir Andrew, but himself?

Lloyd. He had often declared he would give me something by his will.

Q. After you had read this will over dated 1762; did not you desire Mr. Martin to give you leave to carry it to Mrs. Glover; did not Martin say you are welcome to do with it as you please, it is of no use to me; if it is of any to you, you are welcome?

Lloyd. Mr. Martin gave me leave.

Q. Did not Martin say he expected no fee or reward?

Lloyd. I do not remember he said so at that or any other time.

Q. Did not you return again without this will?

Lloyd. No; with it.

Q. Did not Mr. Martin say you was welcome to carry it over again, if I pleased; for Mrs. Glover to show to her attorney?

Lloyd. Yes; that was after I brought it back.

Q. When you came back again, did not you say that you had shown it to Mr. Keatley's clerk?

Lloyd. That Mrs. Glover had showed it to Mr. Keatley's clerk, and that he said, he believed it was Mr. Groves's signature; one of the witnesses of the will.

Court. Did he say anything about Sir Andrew's signature?

Lloyd. I believe he said it was sir Andrew's signature; I cannot be certain: I did not hear him say so; I told the prisoner I had heard that he said so.

Q. If you remember you and I canvassed this bag of paper, and opened them every one?

Lloyd. I deny that; you looked them over then. Martin said, now he is in his glory; he has got all the papers to look over.

Q. You and I picked out a great many papers that were signed Chadwick on them?

Lloyd. You picked them out, and shewed them me.

Q. One paper particularly was obliterated and torn, but plainly the name of Sir Andrew was in the body of it?

Lloyd. Yes, there was; it is among the papers now.

Prisoners council. This is the paper; here is the word sir Andrew upon it. That letter, my lord, has been proved in the court of Chancery; that has been proved in the case of Snipe and Simpson; it has a reference to an estate somewhere in Bunhill fields.

Q. Do you know whether sir Andrew had any estate in Bunhill row?

Lloyd. No.

Prisoners council. You received only for the rents in your neighbourhood I believe?

Lloyd. I never received any rents for him only since his death.

Q. After we had sat down in the dining room, did not you ask me if there was a possibility of finding out people that could prove the hand writing of Tenneson; did not you desire me to go to one Brown, an attorney?

Lloyd. You said you was not clear with respect to Tenneson's hand writing; I said one Mr. Brown, of Liquorpond street, I had heard him say, knew one Mr. Lowe that was acquainted with this Tenneson, and might be acquainted with his hand writing.

Court. Was this the first time the will was produced to you?

Lloyd. Yes; I was made acquainted with the names of the witnesses before I saw the will.

Q. Was you then told there was any doubt about Tenneson's hand writing?

Lloyd. I believe Burch might say he had not got any body to prove Tenneson's hand writing.

Court. How came Brown to tell you he knew one Lowe?

Lloyd. I was talking to this Mr. Brown about this will, and that there was one Tenneson, as Mr. Burch informed me, an attorney; that lived about Lincoln's Inn, a witness; he said there was one Mr. Lowe, who, I think, was intimately acquainted with Tenneson, and he will inform you whether it was his hand writing or no.

Q. Did not you desire me to go to this Brown? did not you desire me to bring as many people as I could the next day to Martin?

Lloyd. Yes.

Court. For what purpose were they to be brought there?

Lloyd. I suppose, in order to see if they could prove the hand writings of the different persons that were witness of the will Mr. Martin produced; Ross was the man that was brought to prove Tenneson's and Field's hand, having a lease, wherein Tenneson was a witness.

Q. This will was intended to be brought there for their inspection?

Lloyd. It was to be returned to be sure for them to see it.

Q. You did not bring it back?

Lloyd. I went over for the will, and Mrs. Glover said she had left it with her attorney.

Q. And you desired the parties to go next morning to Mr. Hulse's chambers?

Lloyd. Yes; and all the parties attended accordingly.

Q. It was looked upon, by Mr. Black, the residuary legatee's attorney, to be a forged will, was it not?

Lloyd. Yes; it was.

Q. I saw no more of you till Thursday evening; you said you had a summons to attend at sir John Fielding 's next day?

Lloyd. No; I said Mrs. Glover had been at sir John Fielding's, and asked me if we had any objection to go to sir John's; both you and Martin said, no, you had not the least objection, and we went all together.

Court. You had before that told them that Mrs. Glover had made an application to sir John Fielding ?

Lloyd. Yes.

Prisoners Council. I think just now you said, the will was delivered by them to you, for Mrs. Glover's inspection?

Lloyd. Yes; she asked to inspect it; I said I had it from the people over the way. I went, and they gave me leave.

Court. Did Martin and Burch at that time know that the authenticity of this will was questioned?

Lloyd. Yes, they did; it was questioned on Wednesday morning by Mr. Black.

Q. We went down to sir John Fielding 's, he was not at the office: the clerk told us there was no summons or any order for Mr. Martin or me.

Lloyd. That is right; the clerk was there; we told him what we came about; he said there was a notice ready for Lloyd to appear next day; I had not received it; Martin and Burch gave me an account of their names, and where they lived; upon which, we made an appointment to meet next day, at eleven o'clock, at the Shakespear Tavern, Covent Garden.

Q. You desired us to bring Mrs. Brooks along with us to sir John Fielding 's, which we did?

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. You desired me to bring the pedigree along with me.

Lloyd. When we came to the Shakespear Tavern, this pedigree was pulled out by one Mr. Walker, who was then in the room; he said, how can you wear out this pedigree so, it will be all rags and tatters; he put it into his pocket, and said, you shall never have it again.

Q. If I am not mistaken, both you and Mr. Brown, your attorney, charged me to bring it there?

Lloyd. I desired you to put it in Mr. Brown's hands.

Q. I did; and he gave it me again, and I produced it. Did not I attend at sir John Fielding 's without any reluctance?

Lloyd. Yes; without any signs of fear.

Q. When Mr. Martin delivered this paper to you, did you see any red lines?

Lloyd. No.

Q. Did not I say it was wonderful to me, that there was a difference in the signature to the two wills in the scroll;

Lloyd. I cannot remember that; you might say so; I do not remember it.

Court. You read the will of 1764, as well as the will of 1762.

Lloyd. Yes.

Q. Now, was the will, of the year 1764 of the same import as 1762 or not?

Lloyd. The 1762 gives the estate to Lady Chadwick; the other sends it to Ireland.

Court. Now I ask you, as an honest man, if you had seen the will of 1764, how you came to be negotiating and carrying about this will of 1762, in order to set it up in prejudice to the will of the year 1764; why you did not as well carry over the will of 1764 as 1762, which was a will made in her favour, as a subsequent will in her disfavour; why not, as an honest man, carry over both wills?

Lloyd. So far I might be blameable; but as the papers were not mine, I carried the will given me.

Court. You asked leave to carry over the will of 1762; I desire to know, why you did not as well ask leave to carry over the will of 1764?

Lloyd. So far I might be blameable: but the papers were not mine; I had nothing to do with them.

Q. How came you to have a meeting next day of all these people, to know whether the will of 1762 was a good one, when you knew of a subsequent will of 1764.

Lloyd. The people were brought to prove the hand writing of the witnesses.

Q. The next morning did you tell any of the parties of the will of 1764 at that time?

Lloyd. I do not know that I did.

Court. Oh! she; and you a man of business.

Lloyd. So far I am blameable.

Court. She was tenant for life in one will, and tenant in see in the other. When was the first time you mentioned this will of 1764?

Lloyd. At sir John Fielding 's; before that, I mentioned it to Mr. Thomas Hutson .

Court. How long was it before you went to sir John Fielding 's?

Lloyd. The same day, I think.

Court. You did not mention, either to Lady Chadwick or Mrs. Glover, the will of 1764?

Lloyd. I mentioned no other will but what I carried?

Q. You saw Lady Chadwick and Mrs. Glover both, did not you?

Lloyd. I delivered it to Mrs. Glover.

Court. You read both the wills. I think you have a legacy of 400 l. by the will of 1762, and the rents in arrear?

Lloyd. Yes, 200 l.

Court. Who is Mrs. Brooks?

Lloyd. The woman of whom Martin had the papers; I know nothing of her; I never saw her till she came that morning to Lincoln's inn.

Council for the Crown. These papers are material; and your Lordship will observe, the papers are supposed to relate to a cause between Thompson, Knipe, and Wilmot, &c. this appears by the titles of one or two of the papers; and here is a paper torn; it is, received of, then the paper is torn, the estate of sir Andrew, then the other names are torn off, situate in Bunhill-row; and then torn off, the sum of 90 l. being in full, I say, received by me; this name must have some tail to it, Chadwick has not a gentleman in court will tell you this has reference to one sir Andrew Knipe ; the proposition is to shew, that they were in the bundle of papers belonging to sir Andrew Chadwick ; I say they are not so; this relates to one sir Andrew Knipe , that was in Bunhill-fields.

Court. I dare say it was sir Andrew Knipe , if there was such a person.

Council. Certainly there was, who lived at Epsom, and had an estate in Bunhill-row; it appears by the indorsement, it was a cause in which a Knipe was concerned.

Mrs. Glover. I was acquainted in sir Andrew Chadwick's family, both in his life, and since his death.

Q. Pray do you know sir Andrew's hand writing?

Glover. Yes; very well. (The officer produces the will and codicils from the commons; the will the 7th of July 1765, and all the seven codicils.) I believe these are all sir Andrew Chadwick's hand writing. (another paper produced.) This is the will I had of Lloyd; it was put in to my hand, on Saturday the 27th of July, I think was the first time I heard there was such a thing, from John Lloyd ; It was shewn me first, the Monday se'nnight after, which I believe was the 5th of August.

Q. Where was you at that time?

Glover. At Lady Chadwick's; we live together in the same house; I am to take and do all her business; she is old, and hears very badly; she speaks to nobody that she does not know, without I am present.

Q. What was it produced to you for?

Glover. As sir Andrew Chadwick 's will. I took it to Mr. Keatley, my lady's agent, he was not at home; I shewed it his clerk; he said he would swear it was sir Andrew's hand writing; I told him not be so hasty, for I would not swear to my own hand writing at the first look. I took it then to Mr. Tuand, my lady's council, he was not at home; I shewed it his clerk, and told him as I did Mr. Keatley's clerk, or to that effect.

Q. Was you conversant in the family of sir Andrew, in his life time, long before his death?

Glover. Yes; a great while before his death.

Q. Do you know of any papers, or memorandums of sir Andrew, relative to his family?

Glover. I never heard him talk about his family; he would scarce mention any such thing as a family.

Q. Was you intimate in the family in 1758?

Glover. Yes; till about 1764; I never was intimate with them till after Mr. Glover died.

Q. Did you hear him say any thing of his pedigree?

Glover. No; never.

Q. I suppose you have seen the will that was produced by Lloyd?

Glover. I signed my name to it at sir John Fielding 's.

Q. From the observation you had made of it, and being acquainted with sir Andrew's hand writing, what opinion did you form of it?

Glover. The first observation I made, was that there was Mrs. Humphreys, lady Chadwick's sister, for whom sir Andrew had a great regard; and that struck me; his having forgot her in the will.

Q. Was that Mrs. Humphreys dead or alive in 1765?

Glover. She died in 1764.

Q. Had you any other doubt?

Glover. Yes; Mr. Groves being a witness; because I had heard him say, he believed sir Andrew had not made a will; I doubted on that account. I never let it go out of my hands till I gave it to Mr. Hulse, the solicitor.

Q. Besides the omission of Mrs. Humphreys and Groves's declaration, what did you think?

Glover. I thought it was not sir Andrew's hand writing; he had a particular turn in his will. I saw the letter r was rather daubed over a little, it had been a little medded, as if not the free pen of a writer of his name.

Q. Then for these reasons you left it very properly with lady Chadwick's solicitor?

Glover. Yes.

Q. Whilst you was in the family of sir Andrew, do you remember any thing of a little bible with any hand writing of his in it?

Glover. Yes; (the bible produced.)

Q. Can you speak to any hand writing in that book? Do you believe it to be any of his hand writing?

Glover. His hand is much altered since this was wrote, I believe that is his.

Q. Was that a book in his own custody?

Glover. In my lady's.

Council for the prisoner. Do you mean to say you are so conversant with his hand writing, as to be able to form a judgment whether that is his hand or not.

Glover. I cannot swear it is, or not; the first part of the writing looks like his, the last part I do not think does.

Q. You said you did not hear him talk of his pedigree?

Glover. No; but I know he did own having relations down in Lincolnshire.

Q. Since his death, who has been in the receipts of the rents of the real estate?

Glover. I believe, Mrs. Law.

Q. What part of that estate was it lady Chadwick had?

Glover. The third part of it, as her right, I believe, she has had on account.

Q. And somebody else has had the other two thirds?

Glover. Yes; or somebody for her.

Cross Examination.

Q. You say that ya, on Saturday, the 27th of July, acquainted you that there was a will?

Glover. Yes.

Q. What did you say to him?

Glover. I asked him in whose favour it was; he said in Lady Chadwick's. I said, how came that: he said it was signed by three witnesses. I asked him who the witnesses were; he said, one Tenneson, and Grove. I said, I believed it was not a right will. I desired to see it. I asked why he did not bring it; he said he would bring it. I said he should not bring it, unless I had some lawyer with me when he brought it. He said, there is the will; now will you believe it: that was all that passed at that time.

Q. I wish you could recollect the whole conversation.

Glover. Lloyd said to me, he thought the prisoner would expect something for finding the will.

Q. Was there any thing else passed?

Glover. No.

Q. What time in the day did he bring the will?

Glover. About twelve o'clock.

Q. I think you say Mrs. Humphreys died about 1764.

Glover. Yes.

Q. That was about the time you became acquainted with sir Andrew's family?

Glover. I was not intimate before.

Court. Did you know Mrs. Humphreys in 1764?

Glover. Yes; and before that.

Q. Was you much acquainted with her?

Glover. No.

Q. You say sir Andrew had a peculiar turn?

Glover. Yes.

Court. How old was sir Andrew when he died?

Glover. I believe about ninety.

Q. I suppose, from 1762 to 1768, there was a good deal of alteration in sir Andrew?

Glover. He was a poor creature; he was rather an unaccountable man.

Q. I believe he was rather apt to hide his wills about in holes and corners?

Glover. It seems so, for fear the two legged rats and serrets should get hold of them.

Q. Did he own his relations in Ireland?

Glover. He did not own his country; he d - d them all.

Q. Do you know of any fortune Humphreys had of her own?

Glover. I do not know; I heard she had some: she took care of lady Chadwick's house?

Q. You say he was unaccountable respecting his actions?

Glover. Yes.

Court. Do you know whether there are two Chadwicks in Ireland?

Glover. Indeed I do not know.

Mr. Hulse. This will was brought to me by Mrs. Glover, I believe on Tuesday.

Q. to Mrs. Glover. The morning Mr. Lloyd brought it to you, did not you give it him to carry back?

Glover. No; he never took it back; I believe he did take it over again at first.

Mr. Hulse. Mrs. Glover brought it to me on Tuesday, the 6th of August; I had it in my custody two or three days. I went with it to sir John Fielding 's on Friday morning, Mrs. Glover, in my presence, at sir John Fielding 's, made that mark upon it. (The will read.) (The original will read.)

(The jury compare the pedigree, the forged will, and the two receipts, and manner of signature, to his genuine will.)

Mr. George Hudson . I am an attorney. I was concerned for the heir at law, Sarah Law , she is in possession now.

Prisoners Council. Have you any conveyance of any part of the estate to you?

Hudson. I never saw any conveyance of the estate.

Q. Is any part conveyed to you?

Hudson. No; on the 5th of August, I received a message from Mrs. Glover that she had seen a will; and that I might see it at Mr. Lawrence's. I had before heard a rumour of a will, and had entered a civeat; on the 6th I saw Mrs. Glover; she shewed me a will; I made my remarks, one was that, the signing was a greater distance than two inches from the writing; in the next place the paper when it was shewed me; though dated in 1762, was much cleaner than I could expect; and from the colour of the ink; I did not think it appeared as if it had been wrote above three days; this was last August; I then read it through; in reading, I made some remarks, and Mrs. Glover made some; she asked me what I thought of it: I said, I thought it a down right forgery, I made no observation of the hand writing, but that it was like his; my eyes are bad.

Council for the Prisoner. Did you ever see Sir Andrew's writing?

Hudson. No.

Q. Did you take any notice of any of the other writings?

Hudson. There was the signing of one Tenneson who had been clerk to an attorney, and had acted for me; but I did not recollect his hand writing; I dined with them that day.

Q. Did Lloyd say any thing when the prisoners were there?

Hudson. Not one word; a will was mentioned.

Cross Examination.

Q. Did you go to Mr. Lawrence's, as Mrs. Glover bid you?

Hudson. Yes; and he said he had it not at that time.

Q. Did he tell you what he had done with it?

Hudson. He told me Mr. Hulse was out of town, so I went home and drew up an advertisement, and put in the paper.

Q. When did you see it?

Hudson. Next morning in Mrs. Glover's house; she sent to me, I came to her, and she shewed me the will.

Q. Who came in?

Hudson. Mr. Keatly was there.

Q. You say Tenneson did business both as a clerk, and on his own account?

Hudson. He did.

Q. I believe he was an attorney, and had chambers of his own in Lincoln's Inn; you said just now it did not appear to have been wrote above three days; in the next place you say your eyes are very bad?

Hudson. I can see colours very well, though I cannot see the minute stroke; I wear spectacles some time, then I can see better.

Q. Why it seems very pale now; what was the difference between then and now?

Hudson. The ink is altered in colour since that time.

Q. Will you swear positive to that?

Hudson. I will swear it appeared so to me, and I believe so now.

Q. You was concerned for this Mrs. Law?

Hudson. Yes.

Q. Pray who is she?

Hudson. Sir Andrew's first cousin.

Q. Where does she live?

Hudson. In Lincolnshire, on a farm that was Sir Andrew's.

Q. Have you ever been down there since Sir Andrew's death?

Hudson. Many times.

Q. Who employed you?

Hudson. Mr. Dearden, an attorney in the country; I am his agent.

Q. Was she not in a workhouse there?

Hudson. Never, that I heard of.

Q. You and Mr. Dearden are in possession of all the estate, are you not?

Hudson. No; I am in possession of the estate, and account to Lady Chadwick for her third, her dower.

Q. And you have accounted for it?

Hudson. I have accounted with them.

Q. Have you accounted with Mrs. Law?

Hudson. They draw bills on me.

Q. And you pay it to Dearden?

Hudson. I account to Dearden.

Q. Account, but do not pay the money, as I find?

Hudson. Yes; I do.

Q. How much have you in your hands?

Hudson. I believe, nothing.

Q. You was before Sir John Fielding and gave an information there?

Hudson. Yes.

Q. Did you ask any body next day, if they could remember what it was you had sworn?

Hudson. No; I believe they put a word or two more into my information, than came from my mouth.

Q. Did not you say you could not recollect what you had sworn?

Hudson. I believe I could, for I read it; and I believe those that know me, know I can read.

Q. Did not you say you believed you had accused the innocent, and let the guilty go?

Hudson. No.

Q. You never made such a declaration to any body?

Hudson. No not as I know of.

Q. You must know if you did?

Hudson. I cannot tell every word I have said, this six weeks, I have been hurried more than any man in London.

Q. Do you know whether you made use of that expression?

Hudson. I have not.

Q. Are you sure of that?

Hudson. Yes.

Q. Just now you said you would not be positive?

Hudson. Yes.

Q. Are you quite positive that you never made use of such an expression?

Hudson. Yes, I am; I suspect more people to be guilty than these people at the bar. I was always satisfied that I had done right, but was doubtful of some people I could not reach.

Cross examined by the Prisoner Burch. Was not Mr. Lloyd employed by you and Mr. Dearden to get all he could out of me, in order to make up your defence against these Chadwick's, that claim'd?

Hudson. I did not.

Q. And that he was paid for that purpose?

Hudson. I employed him as an agent to make distresses and the like.

Q. Did not you say if there was a possibility you would both hang Mr. Martin and me; and that you looked upon Mr. Lloyd and Mrs. Glover to reserve it equally with us?

Hudson. Never, that I know of.

Q. I did not hesitate to shew Mr. Lloyd all the papers I brought from Ireland; when he had seen them he communicated the contents to you; these papers are such vouchers, as will perhaps take the estate another road, contrary to your wishes; these are the motives only that you persecute me for.

Court. Have you seen the vouchers which this man brought over from Ireland of the pedigree of the Chadwick's?

Hudson. No; I had a copy of the pedigree which Lloyd gave me, which I suppose must be brought from Ireland.

Q. When you and Mr. Dearden took possession of the estates, did not you lower the rents, and grant leases, and buffet the poor ignorant people about, and so get into possession of what, in time, will, I believe, appear that you have no right to?

Hudson. Mr. Hammond, the brewer, was represented to me as a man of good character; the house was empty, and I granted him a lease.

Q. Is not there a lease signed by Sir Andrew, now extant, that Mr. Hammond has got; and is there not another granted, subsequent to that, by Mrs. Law?

Hudson. There is; I granted a fresh term at a lower rent; it is a lease of the Fountain alehouse in Broad-street at 10 l. a year les s rent than it was leased at by Sir Andrew, because he was to pay the repairs.

Q. Is not the Fountain now let for 50 l; the original rent on Sir Andrew's lease?

Hudson. I hear it is; but then Mr. Hammond repairs.

Court. What have you for being steward to this estate?

Hudson. A shilling in the pound for receiving.

Court. That is a common allowance.

Mr. George Keatley . I am a conveyancer; I was concerned for sir Andrew from the year 1731 to his death.

Q. Was you intimately acquainted with his manner of writing?

Keatley. I was. (The forged will shown him.)

Q. When first saw you that paper?

Keatley. I think, the beginning of August.

Q. Was it a clean, or sullied paper then?

Keatley. A clean paper.

Q. Was it much cleaner than it is now; or did it look like a paper that had laid among others in a box?

Keatley. I thought it a fresh paper.

Q. Did you make any observation upon the colour of the ink?

Keatley. I cannot say I did.

Q. You are acquainted with Sir Andrew's hand writing; now, what did you think, whether it was his hand-writing or not?

Keatley. I thought then it was not; and I think so now; in the first place, I observed red strokes underneath the writing, and at the time this will bears date, my lady's sister was alive. Sir Andrew has many times spoken to me about his will. The last words I ever heard from him was, I hope, in a few days, I shall see you, and then I will settle this d - d affair of mine: so he used to call the making of his will. He never came to any resolution, not knowing where to fix the reversion of his real estate; but Mrs. Humphreys being alive, he always mentioned her at all events. When I saw this will, I observed Mrs. Humphreys was not taken notice of, though she was alive. I was persuaded it was not Sir Andrew's will.

Q. Did you know Mr. Groves's hand-writing?

Keatley. No; I had no other reason about him than what he declared to me.

Court. You must not mention any conversation you had with him; that is no evidence.

Q. Was there any thing else struck you as a reason why you thought this not to be Sir Andrew's hand?

Keatley. Those I have given were the principal reasons.

Q. You know, I believe, something of Sir Andrew's family; have you ever heard him speak of any brother of his?

Keatley. I have heard him speak of a brother, Captain Green, by his mother, by a second husband.

Q. Did you ever hear him speak of a Thomas, William, or a Peter Chadwick ?

Keatley. Never.

Q. Did you ever hear him speak of any pedigree made out, to shew who was heir at law?

Keatley. Never; I have heard him speak of relations in Lancashire.

Q. Do you know of any of the witness's writings that are supposed to be put there?

Keatley. No; I never heard talk of any but Groves.

Q. Did Groves or sir Andrew die first?

Keatley. Groves acted as executor under the will.

Q. Do you know what sir Andrew's mother's maiden name was?

Keatley. I cannot remember.

Cross Examination.

Q. He had often conversation with you about making his will, and called it his d - d affair?

Keatley. No; his grand affair.

Q. He did not chuse to entrust you with this grand affair?

Keatley. True.

Q. But he made this will himself after all?

Keatley. Yes.

Q. Then, I fancy, he did not tell you all his secrets?

Keatley. No; I believe not.

Q. As to his own family, I fancy, he was not very fond of talking about them?

Keatley. I never heard him.

Q. You are a legatee, I believe?

Keatley. Yes.

Q. Under which will?

Keatley. In this will, if it is a good one.

Q. How much in this will?

Keatley. 1000 l.

Q. And you have been intimate with him, the space of thirty-six years?

Keatley. I have known him ever since 1731, I have lived within five or six doors of him.

Q. Has that will ever been in your custody before?

Keatley. I took it to my house at the time Mrs. Glover and Mr. Hulse were there.

Q. Was it ever less with you?

Keatley. Only to look at.

Q. You said there were some red strokes in in that will?

Keatley. Yes.

Q. But it has been handed about a good deal; are you sure it was there at first?

Keatley. Yes; that was one reason for my not thinking it genuine.

Court. Did you observe red strokes under the subscribing of the witnesses; I observe it only under the first name?

Keatley. I think there is at the d of Field's name.

Q. from Burch. I think the whimsical codicils, as you call them, were secreted till after Mr. Grove died?

Keatley. Yes.

Burch. They were secreted till some time after Mr. Groves died, and then brought out in a surprizing manner.

Q. to Mrs. Glover. Was you by when the will was found of sir Andrew's?

Glover. I never looked for a will of his in my life.

Court. Was Mr. Groves a minister?

Glover. Yes.

Court. Of East Barnet, was he not?

The Fourth Part of these Proceedings will be published in a few Days

Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 21 October 2020), September 1771 (t17710911-64).

Old Bailey Proceedings front matter, 11th September 1771.

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE King's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol-Delivery FOR THE CITY of LONDON; And also the Gaol-Delivery for the County of MIDDLESEX; HELD AT JUSTICE-HALL in the OLD-BAILEY, On Wednesday the 11th, Thursday the 12th, Friday the 13th, Saturday the 14th, Monday the 16th, Tuesday the 17th, Wednesday the 18th, Thursday the 19th, Friday the 20th, Saturday the 21st, Monday the 23d, and Tuesday the 24th of September, 1771.

In the Eleventh Year of His MAJESTY's Reign. Being the Seventh SESSION in the MAYORALTY of The Right Honourable BRASS CROSBY, Esq; LORD-MAYOR of the CITY of LONDON.

NUMBER VII. PART IV.

LONDON:

Sold by T. EVANS, No. 54, in PATER-NOSTER ROW.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE

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

[Conclusion of the Trial of Edward Burch and Matthew Martin .]

COurt. Of East Barnet was he not?

Glover. Yes.

Court. Mr. Field was a rich man; I believe he died worth 40,000 l.

Glover. I believe he did.

Q. Was Mr. Grove acquainted with him in the year 1762?

Glover. Yes; and many years before.

Eleanor Field . I am daughter to Thomas Field , he lived in Devonshire-street, Red Lyon Square; he was a taylor.

Q. Do you know of his having any connection with Sir Andrew Chadwick ?

Field. Not that I know of.

Q. He was not his taylor?

Field. I never heard of his name.

Q. Did you know Mr. Tenneson?

Field. No.

Q. Look at that name, Thomas Field ; do you think it is your father's?

Field. No; I do not believe it is.

Q. Have you ever seen your father write?

Field. Numbers of times; here is a name of his own writing.

Q. Can you give any account where your father was in 1762?

Field. He might be in London, or at his house in the country.

Cross Examination.

Q. Did not you, when before Sir John Fielding , on the will being produced, say that you believed it was his hand writing?

Field. No; when I looked at it first, I said, it was very much like my father's hand writing; but upon examination, I did not believe it to be his.

Court. Do you disbelieve it to be your father's hand writing from any other reason than by comparing it with this receipt in my hand?

Field. I do not believe it to be his hand writing; I should have thought so, if I had not seen the receipt.

Q. How long has your father been dead?

Field. Three years in July last.

Q. Do you know this receipt to be your father's hand writing?

Field. I believe it to be his; I did not see him write it.

Q. Whether you did not tell Sir John Fielding , first of all, that you could not tell whether it was his hand writing or not?

Field. At first it appeared to be like his, but on examination, I did not believe it, to the best of my knowledge, to be so.

Q. Whether you did not say before Sir John Fielding , that it might or might not?

Field. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Then you never said you believed it to be his hand writing?

Field. No.

Q. You did not say at one time you could not form a judgment, whether it was his hand writing or not?

Field. I never said any such thing.

Q. Did you say you believed it to be his hand writing, before you examined it with any paper?

Field. Yes; it struck me at first sight; but, upon examination, I thought otherwise.

Q. You do not know your father was acquainted with Tenneson or Grove?

Field. Not that I know of.

Q. Did not you make use of this expression, before Sir John Fielding , that you would not swear one way or other?

Field. No.

Q. Did you never hear that Tenneson and your father were acquainted together?

Field. I never heard his name.

Q. Do you know one Mr. Rose, a carpenter?

Field. He and my father were acquainted together.

Mr. Gerrard. I am an attorney. I was acquainted with Mr. Grove. I became acquainted with him in the year 1766, and continued to be concerned for him to the time of his death.

Council. Look at the will, signed S. Grove; do you believe that is Mr. Grove's hand writing?

Gerrard. No.

Q. You have often had occasion, from being employed by him to see him write?

Gerrard. Frequently; he was trustee for a great number of persons, in the York Building water works; he was trustee with Sir Andrew Chadwick . I do not believe this to be his hand writing.

Cross Examination.

Q. You was not acquainted with Mr. Grove till 1766?

Gerrard. The beginning of 1766.

Q. You could not have seen him write before that time?

Gerrard. I have a large quantity of his writing before that time.

Council. You cannot tell that.

Gerrard. They were deposited with me as such.

Q. When did he die?

Gerrard. February, 1769.

Court. I believe that letter was not of his writing; he had the pally so much, he could hardly write.

Gerrard. I have a good deal of his writing by me, I have seen him write when his hand shook so that he could hardly write.

Court. Was he not very paralytic before his death?

Gerrard. A little, not much.

Q. I believe he was so paralytic, that he did not read prayers or preach for some time before his death.

Gerrard. No; the reason he told me was, he was preaching at St. James's, and something suddenly affected his voice.

Q. He did not for four or five years, before his death, I believe, read or preach?

Gerrard. I believe rather more; I observed, sometimes, he did not write his name always alike; some I have where he sign'd S. Grove.

Mrs. Grove. I cannot see very well; I will not pretend to swear to my husband's hand writing, my sight is not good enough.

Q. Have you, at any time, been applied to for any receipts of your husband's, for any purpose?

Grove. Yes, lately; about the beginning of August, I believe, by one, that calls himself, Lloyd; to see Mr. Groves's hand writing; I refused.

Court. Pray can you tell what time?

Grove. On the 3d of August he told me there was a will found with Mr. Grove's hand to it, and wanted to compare the hand.

Q. Do you know whether ever your husband employed one Field, a taylor?

Grove. I never heard of his name.

Q. Had he any acquaintance as you know, with one Tenneson?

Grove. I never heard his name.

Mr. Whatman. I am a paper maker, and live at Maidstone, in Kent.

Q. Do you make a great quantity of paper?

Whatman. More than any body in England.

Q. Are you able, from a sight of any paper, to know whether that paper was manufactured at your mill, and at what time manufactured?

Whatman. Yes.

Q. Can you speak with precision?

Whatman. Yes, I can of any of my manufacturing; (shewing him the will.)

Whatman. This paper is my make; here is J. W. in it.

Q. Can you inform the court and jury of the time that it was made?

Whatman. Yes; I have taken pains to speak with precision of it; here is some samples of the same that I sealed up at home, and shewed before the grand jury; it has been sealed up and never opened since.

Q. Can you speak from your own knowledge, without comparing the paper?

Whatman. I can with certainty.

Q. Do you form your judgment merely from the J. W. or other marks?

Whatman. From other marks; these are a particular mould; they were first began to be used in January 1768; I can swear positively to that; this is made on a mould, which is the first mould in which two sheets of this kind of paper was made at once; I am the first person that made it double, two sheets at once, they were in January, 1768; and the first made from these moulds, that was ever sent to London, was the 11th of March, 1768. I will give another convincing proof of it; here is an improvement of our manufactory in this sheet, in regard to blueing it; formerly our papers were of a very yellow cast; we have improved the manufactory, by throwing blue into it, as people do in washing into linen, in order to take off the yellow cast; the first of my doing that, was in April, 1765; this is very blue; so that I do not believe it has been made more than a twelvemonth: if you please to compare it with paper made seven or ten years ago, there is an amazing difference.

Cross Examination.

Q. Could not any body copy your mark?

Whatman. I have ordered several pair of moulds to be made alike, but never saw any two pair alike; they will differ in a wire, or something. I could have brought up twenty or thirty people to swear that sheet is of my manufactory. I have, for the prisoners sake taken a great deal or care, that I might speak with precision.

Q. Did you never make any paper of that sort before?

Whatman. Not before the year 1768.

Q. But had your paper, of 1768, he same mark of J. W.?

Whatman. Yes; but not exactly alike.

Q. Have you any other reason?

Whatman. Till the year 1763 we always put J. W. in a large cypher.

Court. Now show me a J. W. when you changed it.

Whatman. The first J. W. without a cypher is 1764; these are the first pair without a cypher. I never saw any paper with J. W. in it but mine.

Jury. Will not the blueness wear off by time?

Whatman. Yes; and this is so blue, it convinces me it has been made but a short time.

" William Linderman . who is an oilman, deposed that he had seen Burch write once or twice; he was shewn the forged will, and asked whose hand writing he believed the body of it to be; he replied, that when he was before Sir John Fielding , he thought it was the prisoner Burch's hand writing; but that upon a closer inspection, he believed it was not."

William Kimbel . I know both the prisoners by sight. I have known Burch three months; he applied to me for some receipts of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's, about two months ago; I cannot be particular to the time, more than that I think he said they were of no use to him; only that he looked upon a codicil of Sir Andrew's to be forged, and wanted to set it aside. I gave him three receipts; he desired me to get one, which I did of Mrs. Souches's; there were two of mine and one more; Mr. Burch was with me; it was on Sunday night, about ten weeks back.

Q. Do you remember the installation at Windsor?

Kimbel. Yes; it was before that, I saw Burch in the Marshalsea prison.

Q. Did you see him in Theobald-row?

Kimbel. That was before Mr. Burch produced the parchments and these receipts; and asked if I thought that was sir Andrew's writing; I said, yes; he said he thought that would throw those out that were in possession of the estate. He went out to shew the pedigree; he was called out; then he came and said he would not shew me what he was going to shew me then; this was at the Horse and Groom, in Theobald's row; Lloyd was present.

Q. Did he say there was any money due to him?

Kimbel. There was nothing said in relation to this pedigree, nor any thing in relation to any will. I heard nothing of it till I was in prison.

Q. Did you hear of any quarrel?

Kimbel. Yes; he said William Chadwick and he were working together, and they had a quarrel, and Burch struck Chadwick. Nothing else was said about that.

Cross Examination by the Prisoner Burch.

Q. You know a good deal of this affair; you always thought that they were the right people?

Kimbel. I did not know the contrary.

Q. Before you had seen the pedigree you called at my house, and said that Lloyd was employed by Hudson to get what he could out of me; you then made this observation, that Lloyd was an honest, punctual man, and true to his trust ; that I must not trust him with secrets.

Kimbel. Yes; I said I always found Lloyd true to his trust, and as he was employed by the other parties I was certain he would stick by them.

Q. Pray did not you espouse the cause of these Chadwicks once in opposition to Mrs. Law, and recommended them to Mr. Lucas?

Kimbel. No; I did not.

Q. Did not you say, if they stuck by it, they would get into possession of the estate?

Kimbel. No.

Q. With respect to sir Andrew's will and the codicil, they were secreted till after Mr. Grove's death. Did not you say they were found in an odd manner?

Kimbel They were found in his writings.

Q. Did not you hear Lloyd say that sir Andrew said in his life time, he would be a plague to his lady and family in his grave?

Kimbell. He did not say he would be a plague to his lady, but that many that expected benefit by him after his death would be plagued to get it.

Burch. You must have heard Lloyd say, that when sir Andrew died that last codicil had no date at all; that it must be dated after his death.

John Atkinson . I am a grocer and oilman. Burch, the prisoner, applied to me to know if I knew any body that had any receipts of Sir Andrew Chadwick 's; at that time came in one Davis, an old tenant of Chadwick's, I thought he might have, perhaps, some receipts of his; I have drank with him at the Fountain Tavern , in Bread-street, several times; his conversation, in general, turned on Sir Andrew's estates, about his going to Ireland to find out the pedigree, to get the estate for the two Chadwicks, in Ireland. I have seen him shew the pedigree of the family.

Q. What was that to do?

Atkinson. I always understood that he shewed a real pedigree of Sir Andrew's family.

Q. How long ago was the last time he talked to you about this pedigree, and getting the estate for the Chadwicks?

Atkinson. The last time was two or three days before they were at sir John Fielding 's. There were other people there that heard more of the discourse than I did.

Q. For what was the pedigree made out?

Atkinson. I understood in favour of Lady Chadwick; this was within two or three days before going to Sir John Fielding's; it lay by him on the table; ( the pedigree shown him.) This is like it; I made a particular observation of it, and I believe it to be the same.

Q. Did he talk of a will at that time?

Atkinson. I cannot recollect.

Q. Did he say any thing of Lady Chadwick's being benefited by the pedigree, or did you recollect it?

Atkinson. I do not recollect that ever I heard him say any such thing.

Cross Examination.

Q. What he talked about and shewed you was in favour of Lady Chadwick?

Atkinson. Yes.

David Bynon . I was in company with Burch two days before they went to Sir John Fielding's; I heard him say he had been three different times in Ireland, to see after the pedigree of Sir Andrew; he said, he had a great deal of trouble and fatigue, and he said afterwards, that he absolutely offered to get them the estate, if they would advance him 5 l.

Court. Pray what are you?

Bynon. A barber and peruke maker.

Q. Was you acquainted with Burch?

Bynon. I never saw him in my life before; he put his hand to his breast, and said, he really believed Will Chadwick to be the right heir to the estate; when they were going before the justice, Burch said, now we are going all to be taken up, and let them that are guilty suffer.

Burch. As I stand here before God, and this court, I never saw the man before to knowledge; I am near fighted, I do declare I never heard the word 5 l. mentioned.

Cross Examination.

Q. What time of day was it?

Bynon. Between one and two, I believe it was at the Fountain in the back parlour; it was two days before they went to the justice.

Burch. I knew nothing of going to Sir John Fielding 's till the night before I went.

Court. Was you examined before the grand jury?

Burch. No.

Court. You must prove that Sarah Law is heir at law, as you have stated in the indictment.

( The council for the crown called witnesses, who established that fact.)

Burch's Defence.

I neither forged the will or did I publish it. I only acquainted Mr. Lloyd that there were such papers, and he desired very much to see them; he had them, there were two wills thrown down to him; he had a right to take which he pleased; Mr. Martin said, there they are, it they are of any use take them; I desired no see or reward for them; Mr. Lloyd had liberty to take and peruse what he pleased; such as he did not like he threw aside; the first I heard of this will was when I was in the Borough, settling some business with Mr. Martin, he hearing that I had lately come from Ireland; after our business was finished, he said, he had some papers with the name of Chadwick upon them; I desired some time after to see the papers; when I had seen them: I told Mr. Martin and Mrs' Brooks that I did not know whether they were of any material use, for there was a will produced of a later date; I called again about four months afterwards, and brought that pedigree with me, which corresponded with what came from Ireland with the rest of the papers, under the city seal of Dublin, which sets forth all Sir Andrew's brothers; here is a gentleman in court that has taken exact copies of the book; here is a certificate under the hand of the Accomptant General of Ireland, who knows Sir Andrew's brother, Peter; Mr. Lloyd was desirous to have these papers for Mr. Hudson, I told him I would introduce him to the person that had them; he made several overtures to me, he offered me money to introduce him to the person; I at last told him what they were; he had the papers, he did not choose to take the will of 1764, but that of 1762, to Mrs. Glover, I think he brought it back again; that is all I know of the matter, till we came to Sir John Fielding 's; I gave Sir John this account, as near as possible; that Sir Andrew had three brothers is beyond dispute; I went down to Haslington in Lancashire; they were very shy, they refused me a sight of the register book, but I was told one Mr. Smith, a clergyman, twelve miles off, could give me some account of the family; I went to him, he said, we have often been told that this woman is not heir at law; that Sir Andrew has got brothers at Ireland; and he said Sir Andrew's brother went out of the kingdom a little boy, a lad, and never returned again, and he immediately brought me a copy of the record, wherein it is admitted, Allen Chadwick of Dublin, gent. In 1726, Sir Andrew was admitted as only son and heir at law of his father Allen Chadwick, as the point who is heir at law is to be disputed by a bill, now depending in the exchequer, where the Chadwicks have put in their answer, that they are children, descendents of Sir Andrew's brother; Mrs. Law has put in her answer, that Sir Andrew had a half brother, but does not state a whole brother.

Martin's Defence.

What I have to say, is much to the same purpose; I carried the papers to Mr. Lloyd; I let him have them; he took away what he thought proper; I left them with Mr. Lloyd and Burch together, at the Fountain, above an hour; they took away what they thought proper; I asked them for nothing, I met with them casually, looking over some papers, not knowing they were of any use; I am a watchmaker in George-row.

Burch. I forgot to mention there came over the last time with me, Mr. Knight, a very reputable old gentleman, recommended by the accomptant general of Ireland, eighty-five years old; he has been examined by the examiner of the Exchequer; he says, that he knew Allen, the father of Andrew Chadwick , and Peter and Thomas the two sons; and remembers his having mentioned two sons, by the name of Andrew and William, that were in England, in Lancashire; and he remembers James Chadwick died at Dublin; and was buried at Moncaster in the kingdom of Ireland, about five miles from Dublin.

For the Prisoners.

Ann Brooks . I live in Grafton-street.

Q. Are you in any business?

Brooks. No; I have known Burch from about a week after last Christmas; Martin is my brother.

Q. On what occasion did you see Burch?

Brooks. Martin brought him with him to my house.

Q. What papers were there?

Brooks. There were two wills and a parcel of papers, which I found in the drawers, in the bed room of the first floor, Mrs. Lutterel's room; she had been a lodger of mine.

Q. What was she?

Brooks. She was kept by a gentleman; I do not know what is become of her, nor do I know the gentleman's name; she lodged with me between five and six years ago.

Q. When did you first see the papers?

Brooks. The next morning after she went away; she lived with me about five or six months; I did not know that the papers were good for any thing; I put them up into a garret that I made no use of, at that time.

Q. Did you examine the papers before you put them up?

Brooks. No.

Q. What is it five or six years since she left your house?

Brooks. Yes; I expected she might call again.

Q. Where did you live at that time?

Brooks. In Mercers-street.

Q. When did you remove to Grafton-street?

Brooks. I have been there I believe better than two years; when I removed there I put them into a book case; I was not very particular; I just looked at them.

Q. You never opened them?

Brooks I just opened them, but did not read them; I could not read them.

Q. When did you first look at these papers to see the contents of them?

Brooks. About a week before Christmas was the first time I opened them; then they lay on the table; Mr. Martin came in in the interim, and asked what papers they were; I told him they were papers a lodger of mine had left behind her; I did not know what they were.

Court. Did he open them then?

Brooks. Yes; he said that there was a will belonged to Sir Andrew Chadwick ; he left them behind him; I carried them up into the garret again.

Court. Did Martin say there was a will, or two wills?

Brooks. Two wills.

Q. The bundle had been untied and opened?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. Was you present when he found the two will?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. What became of the papers after?

Brooks. I put them in the garret.

Q. When was the first time afterwards, you had any conversation about the will?

Brooks. A fortnight or three weeks, or thereabouts; then Mr. Burch came and looked at them, and said, he believed he knew something of the Chadwicks hand; that he knew who the will belonged to.

Q. When he said they were wills, did he say nothing else?

Brooks. I cannot say; on Monday before he went to Sir John Fielding 's, Burch came and asked me for the old papers; I said, he was very welcome to them; he took them away with him, Martin was with him; they had all the papers from me.

Q. Did you hear any thing said about any other will?

Brooks. Burch brought the papers back after that, and said he had left one of the wills behind him.

Q. But before he had the papers away, or at Christmas, when he was first spoke to about it, did you hear any thing about any other will?

Brooks. No; on Tuesday Burch came again and said, he wanted the other will; and in the evening he called again, and said he had brought the other will back again; then he said, he put it among the rest of the papers; I cannot say he did, I did not see it; they were on the dining room table; he might possibly put it in the rest of the bundle; I cannot say I saw him put it in.

Cross Examination.

Q. You say you are in no way of business?

Brooks. No.

Q. May I presume to ask you by what means you get a livelihood?

Brooks. I do nothing dishonest to get a livelihood.

Q. No; God forbids I only thought it would be proper to ask that question.

Brooks. I have two children by a gentleman that has maintained me this six or seven years past.

Q. Was you in any business when this gentlewoman lodged with you?

Brooks. Yes; I had a husband at that time, and a son.

Q. You said you expected this young woman would call again for these papers?

Brooks. I thought if the papers were of any consequence she would call again, she was in my debt, I took a good deal of trouble to find her; about four months after I found her; I mentioned these papers, she left behind her, and she told me she would pay me and fetch them.

Q. Did you or not, any time before you saw this Lutterel, open this bundle?

Brooks. I opened it and looked in it.

Q. What did you see?

Brooks. A parcel of papers.

Q. Will you take upon you to say, when you first opened the papers, that you saw a will?

Brooks. I did not take any notice then what they were.

Q. You took no notice of a will at that time?

Brooks. No.

Q. When you saw Lutterel, you said something about these papers?

Brooks. She said she would fetch them, and pay me.

Q. Can you tell how long it was before you removed them into the book-case?

Brooks. That was when I removed.

Q. A book case with glass or wooden doors?

Brooks. Looking glass doors.

Q. Did you or not speak to any body about these papers, till last Christmas?

Brooks. No; they were tumbled about, and I thought them papers of no consequence.

Q. Where were they when you looked at them this last time?

Brooks. On the table; when I removed into Grafton-street, I put them in a book case; they were in my way in the book-case; I was taking them out to put them in the garret, when Martin came I was looking for a paper of my own.

Q. Did you tell Martin any thing about these papers?

Brooks. No.

Q. Did he examine them one by one, or how?

Brooks. I was busy about the house; I cannot say as to that.

Q. Did he inform you what they were?

Brooks. He said there were two wills.

Q. Was it right of you, when you had these bundles of a gentlewoman, to let other people have them?

Brooks. She never came to pay me.

Q. Burch came a fortnight after Christmas?

Brooks. I believe not quite so much, he came about a week before Christmas, and about a fortnight after.

Q. When did you last see all the papers?

Brooks. To the best of my remembrance on the Wednesday; they were left in my custody.

Q. What did you do with them?

Brooks. I burnt them.

Q. After having kept them so long as between five and six years, what induced you to burn the rest of the papers?

Brooks. When I went to the gentleman's chambers, in the Temple, there was this gentleman came in, and said it was a forged will, and we were all concerned in it, and said, we should all be hanged; he frightened me so, that I was not myself a week after; so I went home, and burnt the rest of the papers.

Q. On your oath, did nobody desire you to burn them?

Brooks. No.

Q. Were any one of the wills burnt?

Brooks. That I cannot say.

Q. There was a will brought; what is become of that?

Brooks. I do not know.

Q. But there was a will brought back?

Brooks. I do not know that.

Q. But if there was, it was burnt as well as the rest of the papers?

Brooks. I burnt them all.

Q. You do not know whether he put the will back or not?

Brooks. No; I do not.

Q. Was this Lutterel kept by a gentleman?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. He came backwards and forwards, I suppose?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. Who used to pay, the rent, he or she?

Brooks. She.

Q. Do you know that gentleman's name?

Brooks. No.

Q. Do you know whether it was Chadwick?

Brooks. No; I do not.

Q. At the time your brother opened these papers, did you stand close to him?

Brooks. No; I was going backwards and forwards.

Q. Then you cannot say what papers he found at this time?

Brooks. I am sure the parcel of papers, and these two wills.

Q. Had you ever seen these two wills in the bundles, before Martin your brother opened it?

Brooks. Yes; several times.

Q. I understood you never opened the bundle but the morning after Mrs. Lutterel left your house, and then you did not take notice what was in it.

Brooks. I did not then.

Q. You said you opened the bundle, during the time that they lay in the garret in your first house, and that when you removed to Grafton-street, you put them in your bookcase?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. Had you ever opened them then till your brother Martin came and opened them?

Brooks. I opened them when I first went to the house, in Grafton-street.

Q. How long was that before your brother Martin came and opened them?

Brooks. Two years; or above a year and a half.

Q. Now, on your oath, did you know what these papers were, before your brother Martin came?

Brooks. Yes.

Q. Then why was it you said to your brother that there were some papers left by a lodger, but you did not know what they were; cannot you read?

Brooks. Yes; but I could read very little of these papers.

Henry Rose . I knew Mr. Tenneson; he was an attorney.

Q. Did you know Mr. Field?

Rose. Yes; he lived in Devonshire-street; he was a taylor. Mr. Tenneson lived with Mr. Herne, in Lincoln's Inn; I believe he did business for himself, in some things.

Q. Were Tenneson and Field acquainted?

Rose. I have spent several evenings, in company together.

Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Tenneson write?

Rose. Yes; several times.

Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Field write?

Rose. I did see him sign his own will: I am one of his executors. I do not know that I ever saw him write at any other time.

Q. How long is that?

Rose. Between two and three years ago; (the forged will shown him. )

Q. Do you believe the name Tenneson to be his hand writing?

Rose. I should think it was; it is very much like it.

Q. What think you of Mr. Field's writing?

Rose. It is very much like his hand writing.

Q. Do you believe it to be his hand or not?

Rose. I will not swear; I believe it is very much like his hand writing.

Cross Examination.

Q. You did not know Sir Andrew at all, I believe?

Rose. No.

Q. Did you know Mr. Herne, with whom Tenneson lived?

Rose. I had very little acquaintance with Mr. Herne.

Q. He was clerk to Mr. Herne, I believe.

Rose. Yes.

Q. Did you ever hear of Herne or Tenneson being concerned for Sir Andrew Chadwick ?

Rose. No.

George Whitby . I was acquainted with Field; I have seen him write several times.

Q. Can you say whether that is or not his hand writing?

Whitby. I cannot swear it; it is a good deal like it.

Q. What is your belief?

Whitby. To the best of my knowledge it is not.

Samuel Inman . I was well acquainted with Mr. Tenneson, he was an attorney; he was principal agent to Mr. Herne; he had chambers of his own; and Mr. Herne gave him his common law business.

Q. He did business for himself?

Inman. Yes; I have employed him as my attorney.

Q. You have seen him write, I believe?

Inman. Yes.

Q. Look at that will, and see if you think it his hand writing.

Inman. This is his hand-writing. I can speak as positive as a man can that was not present when it was wrote. I have seen him write many times, an hundred, I suppose; here is his hand-writing in these books (producing several volumes of the Spectator.)

Q. Did you ever know him make use of red lines when he wrote?

Inman. No.

James Lowe . I am an attorney, and live in Carey-street. I was acquainted with Mr. Tenneson. I have seen him write a great many times (takes up the forged will.) I have not the least doubt but that this is his handwriting.

Q. When did he die?

Lowe. In February, 1767.

Council. Please to look at the volumes of the Spectator; have you any doubt whether that is his hand-writing?

Lowe. None in the world.

Q. Pray when did Tenneson leave Mr. Herne?

Lowe. He was with him at the time of his death. He died in Mr. Herne's house.

Q. Do you know whether Herne or Tenneson were ever concerned in Sir Andrew Chadwick 's affairs?

Lowe. I can't say.

Council. I believe, Sir, you did not know Sir Andrew Chadwick ?

Lowe. No.

Mr. Kelley. I knew Sir Andrew Chadwick for upwards of twenty years. I have seen him write very often (looks at the forged will.) I saw this will at Sir John Fielding 's. I there said, I believed it was Sir Andrew Chadwick 's handwriting. I believe so still; and I believe this subscribing witness to be Mr. Tenneson's handwriting; he and I have executed several deeds together. It is fifteen years ago since I saw Mr. Grove write; this is written S. Grove; he sometimes wrote his name so, sometimes Saml.

Cross Examination.

Q. Do you remember the particular instruments you have seen Sir Andrew sign?

Kelley. Not the particular instruments; I have seen him sign fifteen instruments, at least. I think he never did live in this world if that is not his writing. I dare say I have seen him write five hundred times.

John Knight . Here are the copies of some registers from Ireland, and two from St. James's parish (producing them; they are read.)

' Buried, Ellis Chadwick , late of the city of ' Dublin, gent. who died suddenly; and before ' he departed, he desired Mary Williams and ' Henry Davis , of this parish, to write to his ' son, Sir Andrew Chadwick , of Golden-square, ' London; that it was his desire and will that ' his second son, William, should enjoy his estate, ' at Hasslington, in England; and that after ' his son's death, his children might enjoy the ' same; and that his watch might be given to ' his son Thomas.

' June 3, 1725.'

Second.

' Ellis Chadwick , and Ann Maria Newmarch , ' were married July 10, 1669, being ' both of Stillorgan.'

Third.

Licences in the parish of Monckton, and parishes adjoining.

' Andrew, the son of Ellis and Ann Maria ' Chadwick, of Stillorgan, was baptised the ' 2d of July, 1670.'

' Baptized, William, Peter, and Thomas, ' three sons of Ellis and Ann Maria Chadwick , ' in the parish church of Lucan, September 11, ' 1673.'

Knight. I suppose it was in the parish, but the parchment was extremely blotted.

Fourth.

' Monckton, 1711, Burials.

' Ann Maria Chadwick , wife of Ellis Chadwick , ' of the city of Dublin, August 29, 1711.

Knight. This comes from the parish of St. James's, London.

' Baptized the 27th of December, 1713, ' Charles Chadwick , of William and Mary, ' born the 6th.'

Knight. This is an exact copy of the book.

' Baptized, the 27th of April, William ' Chadwick, of Charles and Frances. April, ' 1745, Charles Chadwick , of Charles and ' Frances.'

Q. Do you know any thing of Mr. Hudson's conduct in this affair?

Knight. He spoke against Lloyd; he said, that as Lloyd was one of the principal people to prosecute these men, he thought it not proper to send him to prison.

"Upon his cross examination he said, that he was employed to take copies of the registers by one Mr. Slade, and not by either of the prisoners; that he first saw Burch in March last, when he was over in Ireland, and that Burch was with him when he copied the registers; that he believed Burch was employed by Slade; that Slade paid the expence; and that he saw a large pedigree in England."

"Burch called Mr. Rose, who had known him twenty years; - Harper, four years, who did not know Burch's business; - Vanghan, an upholsterer, about twelve months, who did not know what Burch's business was, but had heard he was in the fish way; he deposed, that Burch came to his house with Charles and William Chadwick about two months ago; that Burch wanted to have some satisfaction for his trouble; and that the two Chadwicks gave him their joint notes to the amount of 4000 l. that he believed the notes were witnessed by Martin; that they were given Burch as a consideration for his trouble, he having been three times over to Ireland; that after that the pedigree was produced by Burch; that this was about a fortnight or three weeks before they went to Sir John Fielding 's; that Lloyd said he would swear that the pedigree was Sir Andrew Chadwick's hand-writing."

Burch. I did not solicit them to give me the notes; I told them that they were good for nothing; I said, you may give them me as an earnest of your intentions. I said as no adequate value was given for them, they might be set aside.

He also called,

"- Impey, who had known him from the year 1769, but had had very little knowledge of him; who all gave him a good character."

"Martin called no witnesses to his character."

Both guilty, of publishing the will, knowing it to be forged . Death .

See Martin tried, No. 172, in Mr. Alderman Beckford's Second Mayoralty, for stealing plate out of a dwelling house, when he was cast for transportation, but obtained a free pardon.

Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 21 October 2020), September 1771 (t17710911-64).

Old Bailey Proceedings front matter, 11th September 1771.

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE King's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol-Delivery FOR THE CITY of LONDON; And also the Gaol-Delivery for the County of MIDDLESEX; HELD AT JUSTICE-HALL in the OLD-BAILEY, On Wednesday the 11th, Thursday the 12th, Friday the 13th, Saturday the 14th, Monday the 16th, Tuesday the 17th, Wednesday the 18th, Thursday the 19th, Friday the 20th, Saturday the 21st, Monday the 23d, and Tuesday the 24th of September, 1771.

In the Eleventh Year of His MAJESTY's Reign. Being the Seventh SESSION in the MAYORALTY of The Right Honourable BRASS CROSBY, Esq; LORD-MAYOR of the CITY of LONDON.

NUMBER VII. PART IV.

LONDON:

Sold by T. EVANS, No. 54, in PATER-NOSTER ROW.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE

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