Star. — London, England, 1824-12-04 00:00:00

THE LITE MIL PAVNTLEROY. It appears that the house of Marsh, Sibbald, and C o , was formed about thirty years ago.. It consisted o f a Mr. Marsh, a partner in the firm of Marsh rind Co. na vy-agents, and Sir James Sibbald. These Gentle men could provide ,capital ; but as they were both ig norant of banking business, it became necessary to pro cure the assistance of a confie.ential clerk in some bank ing-house, who would be allowed to share in the pro fits of that business of which he was to be the sole con ductor. In their research they met with Mr. Emit leroy, sen. who bad been for years in the house of Bar clay and Co. in the City ; and Mr. Stracey, a near rela tive of Mr. Marsh, who had been for a year or two in an East India house in the City, and then a very young man , was also joined. The unhappy man who was re cently executed was educated by his father in the house. Being eat ly initiated into the details of Marsh and Co.'s ; Jails, he was, on the death of his father, in 1807, calleJ upon to take that situation in the management of t he concern which his patent had previously occupied. in the year 1814, Mr. Graham, a relation of Mr. 3l a rsh, who haLiquitted the army in 1795, and who, by the way, we believe never held higher rank than Cap tain, was taken into the house. Sir J. Sibbald died in 1S19; and from that time up to the period of Mr. Faunt leroys apprehension, the firm consisted of himself, Mr. m a r s h, Mr. Stracey, and Mr. Graham. It is difficult to point out the precise period at which Mr. Fauntleroy commenced that system of fraud which ultimately led to a premature and ignominious death. It is probable that forgery was not tesorted to, until all other means o f relief were exhausted. Having the sole controul of the affairs of the firm, he appears, at an early period, to have forced a connexion, by no means profitable, by :ndulging in the speculation of advancing money to huiliers, to an extent which very considerably cramped the house in its re.ources. Its credit in the City was much shaken by the failure of Brickwood and Co. in Ist°. What immediate means were adopted, after the }.allure of Btickwood and Co. to support the reduced milk of the house, does not distinctly appear; but it bas been ascertained, that early in 1814, Mr. Fauntleroy began to look throisgh the accounts of those customers 1/11 whose stock the firm received the half-yearly divi • Jends: and, selecting those least likely to be called for, to appropriate the principal to the use of the house. It is known that the whole of the' money produced by des of stock under forgeries found its way into the, I,•)use ; but the apportionment of it, when there, has only been ascertained to a partial ez•ent. Suffice it, however, to say, that in the years 1814 and 1815, Mr. Fauntleroy, in this manner, disposed of stock to the 'amount of 170,0001. and, when it is considered that he had to provide the dividends, not only upon this sum, but upon a constantly accumulating amount of subsequent forgeries—that he had to replace much of anal stock by purchasing at a very enhanced price— taat he had been maintaining a personal expenditure ;ready beyond what the business could afford—and that the house, under his auspices, still continued its advances to builders, it will not be thought surprising lowever monstrous it may be, that the amount of stock silLl by Mr. Fauntleroy under forged powers, and neither replaced nor accounted for to the stockholder, amounts in sterling money to nearly 400,0001. This is independent of frauds committed by misapplying sums -eceived for the purpose of investing stock—of stock told under genuine powers obtained by the prisoner, to be used in events which did not arise, and of claims for , ectitities deposited in the house, but made away with, tucli will probably amount to the sum of 150,0001. loore. The frauds of Mr. Fauntleroy were extended through a period of ten years, with a degree of labour and ;lit truly astonishing. Some idea may be formed of the labour and anxiety nd this proceeding, when it is considered, that latterly lie was obliged to raise and to enter into the books of the hnuse, dividends to the credit of the customers ex reeding the amount of those actually received by nearly 4,040/. per quarter. The forgery on Miss F. Young, 1A•ho was no relation to Mr. Fauntleroy) was effected in 1815. It was for this forgery that he was convicted and executed. It appeared that Miss Young had al ways kept a banking-account at Marsh and Co.'s. In the month of May, 1815, she was the holder of 5,450 k Consols, and the house of Marsh and Co. had a power of attorney to receive her dividends. On the 90th of May, 1815, a power of attorney was obtained, in the usual manner, at the Bank, for the sale of 5,0001. part riche sum standing in Miss Young's name; and on the 31st, that power was left at the Bank, apparently duly executed by Miss Young ; but it ultimately appeared that her name, and the names of the two attesting wit nesses, were forged by Mr. Fauntleroy. The stoat was mad on the Ist of June, by Mr. Spurling, a broker, to Mr. Flower. On that day, Mr. Fauntleroy attended at ' , the Bank to Istake the transfer, and the produce of the stock was paid, on the same day, by Mr. Spin-ling into Martin and Co.'s, a banking-house in the City, where Marsh and Co. kept a large account. The produce of this forgery was clearly traced from the broker, through the house of Martin and Co. to Marsh and Co. and ul timately, in the prisoner's own hand-writing, to his own especial crediN in his private account,. The second indictment against the prisoner was 'or forging and uttering a power of attorney, with intent ti defraud Colonel T. Lyster of 6,0001. 4 per Cents. iJo the 10dt of December, 1819. Colonel Lyster, who left England, for St. Helena, in 1816, and did not re turn until 1821, had, for several years, kept a banking account with Marsh and Co. During his absence, he t::rected his dividends to be invested. In April, 1819, lie was possessed of a sum of 5,5031. Bs. 9d. in the 4 er Cents. In the month of July, in the same year, his b.ila Ice, in the hands of the bankers, being 1,0011. 7s. I d. Fatintleroy laid out that sum in 1,1411. 4.5. 6d. 4 per Cents. making a total of 6,64.41. 13s. 3d. He enclosed an account of this purchase to Colonel Lyster, together with a Stock receipt. Finding that Colonel Lyster bad got into the habit -of accumulating, Mr. Fauntleroy considered his as an account not likely to be , oen wanted by the party, and therefore suited for his P . lrpose. Ile forged a power of attorney, in which he de ribed " Col. Lyster, of Wexford, in Ireland, but now in , London," which power was executed on the 10th of , December, 1819. Col. Lyster was, in fact, at St. Helena. in order was sent to Mr. Spurting, the broker, to sell out 0,0001. of this stock, which he accordingly did, and Faontleroy attended at the Bank, Oh the 16th of December, and under the forged power transferred `OOO/. to the account of Mr. M'Niel, and 3,0004 to the account of Mr. Clements, both jobbers. The produce was paid by Mr. Standing into the account of Marsh and Co, at Mat tin and Co.'s. .Colonel Lyster subse- Tacitly gave directions for various puacha-es of stock 111 the same fund, which, with the balance left by Mr. Vagnilerr 7 , formed a total of 1,7351.6% which at the Itime of the discovery of these frauds stood to his mint in the Bank bOoks. On that sum the dividend was re ceived at the Bank, although the credit given by Marsh and CO. to Colonel Lyster, and entered by Mr. Fauntleroy himself, was for the dividend on 7,7351. Gs. It appeared that the list of dividends becoming due to persons for whom Marsh and Co. were authorised to re ceive them at the Bank, was prepared by Mr. Fauntle roy ; and in the last of those lists, the whole of which was in his hand-writing, Colonel Lyster was thus en tered" Thomas Lyster, 1,7351. 6s.' and a dividend warrant on that sum for 341. 14s. Id. was paid to Marsh, though the entry in the books of the house is "Thomas Lyster, 7,7351. 6s. dividend, 154./.145. Id." and that entry also in Mr. Fauntleioy's hand-writing. The produce of this forgery was paid into Martin and ' Co.'s; but such was the art of Mr. Fautttleroy, that every effort to discover its final appropriation has been baffled. The third indictment charged Mr. Fauntleroy for forging and uttering a power iif attorney for the trans fer of 5,3001. 4. per cent. annuities, from the account of H. Fauntleroy, J. D. Hume, and J. Gondchild, trus teesof Mrs. Bellis and family. This tran..action, which led to Fauntleroy's detection, was of a most atrocious character. It appears that, in 1820, Colonel F. W. Bellis was entitled to the following funds-17,5001. Navy 5 per Cent , . 5,3001. 4 per Cents. 48,0001. Re duced ; 10,0001. Imperial. He determined to settle these funds upon his wife and children, with a view, perhaps, to avoid the legacy duty. The trustees named were Mr. J. 1). Hume, an officer in the Customs ; Mr. J. GoodchilJ, then a surgeon at Westerham ; and Mr. Faantleroy ; and a deed was prepared accordingly, de claring the trusts of the settlement. The funds which were standing in the name of Colonel Bellis were trans ferred on the 9th of August, 1820, to the trustees; and on the 9th of September, Mr. F•µntleroy commenced, by selling out, under forged powers of attorney,l7,sool. Navy 5 per Cents. On the 18t.h of September he sold out the 10,0001. Imperial ; and on the 2J of Novem ber he sold out 46,0001. Reduced, and the 5,3001. 4 per Cents.in question. The trust of this 'pat ticular suni was for Ovlonel Bellis during his life, and for his nine children on his decease. The forged power of attorney, under which this stock was transferred, bore date the Stith of October. The signature of H. Fauntleroy, and of two of the attesting witnesses, James Tyson, and Jo seph Golightly, were genuine; but that of Mr. Hume, and the signatures of Sir It. and Lady liardinge, with the signature of the other trustee, Mr.Goodchild,were forged. On the 2cl of November, the stock was transferred by Mr. Graham, who states, that all he knew of the trans action was, that Mr. Fauntleroy desired him, if he were going into the City, to call upon the broker, where he would find some transfers ready, and he had done so. Mr. Graham, who, though in business since 1796, is described as being very unacquainted with , business, was hardly allowed to ask any questions as to the trans actions of the house, and Mr. Fauntleroy seemed to have availed himself of this circumstance to make Mr. Graham transfer stock to an enormous amount under forgeries. Colonel Bellis's trust stock was not sold by Mr. Spurling, the regular broker of the house, but by another broker, named Simpson, whom Mr. Fauntleroy professed to be desirous to serve. The prisoner's rea son, however, for employing another broker was, be cause Spurling, having witnessed the transfers trom the name of Colonel Bellis to the trustees sty recently, would have thought something wrong if he had found this stock sold out by the trustees so soon after it carte into their names. The sum of 15,2111. 13s. 9J. for which Mr. Simpson sold the 5.3001. 4 per cents. and 16,0001. Reduced, he paid as follows s-10,0001. at Marsh and Co.'s, which is entered in the waste-bock in Mr. Fauntleroy's own hand to the credit of an account, a H. F., W. B." and the balance, 5,2111. 13s. 9.1. was paid to Martin and Co. in a check, which sunk is also entered in Marsh and Co.'s day-book to the credit of "H.F. W. B." Upon that account Mr. Fauntleroy alone drew. This. was one of the most monstrous specimens of impudent fraud that ever was practised; tor it was from this very art count,-" H. F. W. B. that, in the August preceding, Mr. Fauntleroy had drawn upwards of 50,0001. to buy the identical stock of Colonel Bellis, then sold out. The dividends were punctually credited on this £5,300 Four per Cents. The mode of receiving and crediting the dividends in Miss Young's and Colonel Lyster's case applies here, with this difference—that in the present case, the prisoner cleared the account entirely. It was not, therefore, a question of crediting £lO6 half-yearly, when he received only £5O, but of crediting £lO6 where he received not a farthing. Colonel Bella died in Ja nuary last, leaving his widow, and two daughters of age, one daughter 17 years old, and seven younger children. It was considered prudent by the trustees, under the advice of Mr. Hughes, their solicitor, to ad- minister the affairs of the estate under the direction of the Court of Chancery. This, for obvious reasons, was strenuously opposed by Mr. Fauntleroy. His arguments appeared to have little weight with his co-trustees, but the case was different with the Ladies. Lr their eyes the conduct of Mr. Fauntleroy was disinherited, but that of-the solicitor clearly interested. Mr. Fauntleroy called on Mrs. Bellis, and she addressed a letter (dicta ted by Mr.-F.) to Mr. Hughes, expressing her displea sure at the steps he had taken in Chancery, and com manding that all further proceedings should be stayed. This letter was inclosed in one from Mrs. Beats to Mr. Fauntleroy, to be made use of if necessary ; but it appeared that Mr. Hughes, Lading that nothing effectual could be done before the closing of the offices, consented to allow the matter to stand over the long va cation. - Thus the business stood, and various meetings of the trustees took place, in which the fact of the existence of the funds was the basis of the whole discus sion. Mr. Fkuntleroy argued that it was hard to take out of the hands of the banking•house such an account for the purpose of placing it in those of the Accountant , General of the Court of Chancery. Mr, Hughes sup posed this to be the real objection, but the perseverance of Mr. Fauntleroy's conduct was such, that the co trustees became suspicious. Application was made at the Bank on the 9th of September, and it being dis covered that the stocks were all gone, a warrant was obtained, and Mr. Fauntleroy was taken next morning. His first attempt was to arringe the matter, by giving security to replace the stock, &c. but that of course, was out of the question. Some documents were found in Mr. Fauntleroy's desk which threw considerable light on his turther intentions, and form a branch of the fraud of a nitst extraordinary description. It appears that Mr. Fauntleroy, in the month of August, finding that he could not do away entirely with the Chancery suit, had endeavoured to obtain 'a respite till November —not, as was at first supposed, to go- to America with what money he could put together, but to in• volve himself, if possible, more deeply in a tissue of fraud; and, but for the suspicions of the trustees, which cut short the thread of his pursuits,' he. would have again commenced a new series of forgery. On searching his private desk, there was found a power of attoriey, not etecuted, for the transfer of the sum of 5,3001.4 per Cents. from the Nelme of alr. E. Collins, of Frolsworth, in Leicestershire; a customer of the house, to the trustees of Colonel liellis—that Messrs. Fauntleroy, Hume, and Goodchild. This power was delivered from the 1 . 14nk, on the 18th /loom, 182 t, in . - consequence of a ticket in Mr. Fauntlerny's writing. In this fraudulent niAnner there C3ll be no doubt but that, for the intervention of the circumstances already mentioned, the whole of this stock would have been replaced in time to transfer to the Accountant- General. By the fourth indictment, Mr. l; au? le roy was charged with firging and Dueling as tine, a power of attorney, for the trap-fer and sale cr , 4841. Long Annuities, from the accnnnt of John Griffith. Mr. G. in the month of June, 1823, became possessed of a sum of 6841. 19s. Long A n n u iti es , w hich, on the sth of that month was transferred into his name. Oo the same day his brother obtai:,ed a power of attor ney to the house of Marsh attd Co.fOr the receipt of di vidends on his fund, and the power was sent down to Mr. Griffith, who resided in Devonshire, for his execution. He accordingly did execute it, •and it was forwarded to the house of Marsh and Co. Mr. Griffith had been an old customer of the house; and Mr. Ksuntleroy, know ing that he was Hot likely to make any troublesome in quiries respecting his stock, determined to, approliriate it to his own use. With that view, he, on thy 13th of Jose, procured a blank power of attorney ,fok the sale of 5001. of this very stock, such power having been ob tained at the Bank by a ticket in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand writing. He immediately proceeded to concoct the regular signature and attestations; and for that purpose he imitated the writing of Mr. J. GAO) and his son, (the latter being an attesting witness,) which were af fixed to the power of attorney for the receipt of divi dends which was in his possession. The other attest- ing witness to the power of attorney for the re ceirt of dividends was a Captain Bailey, of the Royal Chediire Miiitia, whose signature being long, and in a confined hand, he did not think proper to imitate, but substituted the signature of " James Kirby, clerk at Marsh's?' He then dispatched the forged power into the City, to be acted on. In this case, his directions were given to Mr. Simpson, one of his private brokers, to raise £lO,OOO. For this purpose, Mr. Simpson sold £484 Long Annuities, and on the 30th of June, Mr. Fauntleroy attended at the Bank, and transferred the stock under the forged power, leaving only £199 6s. standing to the credit of Mr. Griffith. The , brokerage on this transaction was £l3, to one half of which Mr. Fauntleroy was entitled ; and accordingly Mr. Simpson drew a check in favour of him for £lO,OOO 10s. which there is no doubt, from certain marks on it, was paid into his own hands. In Martin and Co.'s pass-book this was credited to H. Fauntleroy on the 30th of June; but in the book kept by Marsh and Co. to check that of Martin and Co. there was no sum approaching to this entered on the 30th of June. On the 2d of July, bows ever, there was entered in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand-writing " July. 2, Cash £10,000," and in the day-book of .Marsh and Co. under the date of July 2, was entered " H. F. 5,600/. ditto 4,4.001." and in the private ledger ,there was an entry in Colonel Graham's hand-writing, crediting Mr. Fauntleroy to that amount in his private account. This instance presented another specimen of the irregular manner in which the business of this house was conducted. There was no doubt that the 10,0001. in question was the produce received from the sale of Mr. Griffith's stock ; yet those who had the in vestigation of the case were totally unable to trace what becante \ of the 61.105. for brokerage. The sum un doubtedly wai small; but a banking-house which could allow such an ekror to pass unnoticed must have been suh., ject to any imposition that might be practised,as an error' of 6/. would equally defeat the balance as an error 6,000 i. The power for sale contained a clause for dividenN and under this, the October and April dividends on the balance of 1991.65. standing to the credit of Mr. Gas fith, were duly received—namely, 991. 135. in each pay ment; instead of which, there was credited to Mr. Griffith, at each of these periods, in Marsh and Co.'s books, the sum of 3411. 13s. being the full divi dend o* the entire of Mr. Griffith's stock. The entry of 341/.131. to the credit of Mr. Griffith, as a dividend on his Long Annuities, was in Mr. Fauntleroy's hand writing. He could not have taken it from the real divi dend-warrant, which was for 991. 13s. only. The an swer was quite obvious : he had sold out as much of Mr. Griffith's stock as would make the precise difference between 991. I 3s. and 3111. 13s. He had received the produce, and he knew that the stock was not standing in Mr. Griffith's name—but that Mr. Griffith was ea titled to credit for it, the sale having been made with out any authority.— Times. A great deal of business continues to be done in the Shares of Public Companies. The Liverpool and Man chester Rsil Road shares have been sold at a premium of forty guineas each ; for the vast importance of this. undertaking to commerce is so apparent, that no doubt is entertained of their Bill being passed through Parlia ment next Session. The practice of the Banisters who are accustomed to do business at the Old Bailey Cout ts has hitherto proved very unprofitable this Sessions. It probably was never known to occur-before, that on the first day of the Se.- siotis, of 42 prisoners who took their trial, one only was defended by Counsel. Perhaps the advantage of parties employing professional , advocates may be fairly infer red from the fact, that of the above number of prison ers, 36 were convicted. A true bill was found at the last Marlborough Ses sions against Joseph Hayae, Esq. of Burderop Park, Whiteheaded Bob, alias Robert Baldwin, and others, for assaulting the steward of the former Gentleman. — On Thursday week last, we are informed, Mr. Hayne entered into recognizances of 50/. for himself, and for each of his companions in this affair, for his and their appearance at the new Devizes Session. The boiling-houie and still-house, at Richmond estate, St. Ann's Jamaica, were totally consumed by fire, as' also thirty .two hogsheads of sugar and six puncheons of rum. The fire is supposed to have originated by a spark from the still-horse chimney falling n the roof. It appears from a provincial paper, that a Clergy man of. the Established Church has been imitating the Catholic Clergy of France in refusing the rites of Chris tian burial—not to an actor Certainly, bin to as inof fensive a character, a fisherman. The friends of the poor man attended in the Church-yard with the body, 'when they were met by the priest, who, taking hold of the coffin, said it should not enter the Church. The reason alleged was, that as the deceased never went to Church when alive, he would take care that he did not go in when • dead. Now, we think that a clergyman guilty of such conduct would not be worth hea: log. COMMON COUNCIL. A Common Council was held yesterdarat Gui ldhall for the general dispatch of public business. It being the first Court in the present Mayoralty, the LORD MAyort came in state, and addressed the Court on taking his seat. Mr. Deputy Reeves moved a Resoluti.ni of Thanks to the late Lord M ryor. which was seconded by Mr. Deputy VA LE, and after some observations from Mr. JAMES, Mr. S. Dix )sr. and Mr. Sheriff littowx, fhe mci‘ Lion was agreed to unanimously. The Colic also directed the Resoluti .n to he orna mentally written on vellum, signed by the Town Clerk, prnpe•ty eniblAzoned, framed and glazed, and pre sentel to the late L.nd Mayor. Toe Chamberlain was directed to present a Purse of Fifty Guineas to the late Lord Mayor's Chaplain, as a token of the esteem and approbation of the Court. A Menlo, ial from Colonel TmeNcur, in relation to the propo-ed 'Dimes Quay, was presented and referred to the Navigation Committee, to consider and report. Mr. JAM es presented a Memorial frtm John Prinsep, Eig- resigning his office of Bailiff of Southwark. The Court accepted the resignation, and appointed the nest, Court for the Election of a Successor, and the City Soli citor was a:spointed to act as Bailiff in the interim. The Court then proceeded to the Election of a Mar., I 'badman ; and Henry Foster being the only Candidate, was unanimously elected. The Coal and Corn Committee presented a Report on a reference made to them inconsequence of a repre sentation of the late Lord Mayor respecting the price of coals, and on a communication they had received of a supply of coals being likely to be brought into the Port of London, from a new district, provided a mea sure for establishing a Rail-road-, entitled the Tees and Weardale Rail-road Bill, should receive the sanction of the Legislature. The Report was agreed to, and ordered to be printed for the information of the Members, and the Court re quested the City Representatives, and such other Mem bers as have seats in Parliament, to support the Bill when brought into the House of Commons. OLD BAILEY, DECEMBER S. Lot Cartlidge was indicted for a burglary in the dwelling-house of amid Jones, in Leather-lane, Hol born, and stealing therein a quantity of ribands, sad other articles, value £5, his property. The prosecutor's shop was robbed on the evening of Sunday, the 17th of October, during Mrs. Jones's ab sence, at about six o'clock, and some of the property was found in the prisoner's possession next day. He said that he purchased the property at a public-house, but offered no evidence of that fact. He, however, called witnesses, who swore to an alibi. The Jury, after some deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty of stealing in a dwelling-house to the value of 403. There was another charge of burglary in the calendar against the same prisoner ; but be was not put on his trial for it. OPINION OP TIM TWELVE JUDGES, JR TUE MATTER OF ROBERT BALL This prisoner was tried and found guilty of the crime of arson at the last sessions, he having been ploved to have set fire to a house described as the dwelling-house of Mr. Fearn, of the Strand. On that occasion the Learned Counsel for the prisoner star ted the objection, that Mr. Fearn having taken the benefit of the Insol vent Debtors' Act, had assigned over his property, amongst which was the lease of the house in question, to the provisional assignee of the Court, in whom the legal possession was vested, and consequently the house ought to have been described as the property of the assignee, and not of Mr. Fearn. This objection Mr. Justice Gatelee submitted to the Judges, who having maturely consi. dered the same, declared it to be insupportable, and it was accordingly overruled. This being the case, the prisoner will receive sentence of Death at the end of the Sessions. Mary Ams Hycroft was capitally indicted for stealing in the dwelling-house of J. Clark, property to a very considerable amount, on the 12th of November last.— The facts of the case were conclusive against the pri soner, and the Jury found her Gouty—Death. TRIAL Or SAM.DEVALL, FOR AN ATTEMPT TO MURDER. On the COMMON SERJEANT taking his seat, the pri soner was arraigned for attempting, on the 30th of Oc tober last, to kill and murder Mary his wife, by shooting at her with a pistol. On the witnesses being called, the wife came into Court, and the prisoner immediately fixed his . eyes on her with a peculiar fire, and uttered a most dreadful oath, accusing her of inconstancy and perjury. He was, however, stopped by the clficers, and the wit nesses for the prosecution were then called. The prosecutrix was then sworn, and deposed to the circumstances that occurred on the occasion in questit3, in the same way that appeared in our reports of the In quiries on the different examinations. In addition, it' appeared that the unfortunate man had twice attempted his own life. The COMMON SZILIZANT here suggested to the Jury, whether it would be necessary to go on further P at the same time intimating to them, if they had the least doubt, of the propriety of proceeding; The Jury consulted for some moments, and then found the prisoner Not Guilty, on the ground of insanity. This verdict having been recorded, tile prisoner bowed and left the Court ; he will, of course, be continued in custody until the pleasure of his M ijesty is known. NEW COURT-OLD BAILEY-THIS DAY. ROBBING FURNISHED LODGINGS. Jobs Callen, and Grace Culins his wife, were indicted for stealing various articles of bed-linen, &c. on the 10th of November last, trona their ready-furnished lodgings, at East Smithfield, in the parish of St. John. Wapping. Sarah Simpson, the prosecutrir, deposed, that she was a widow woman; the two prisoners lodged with her for some time • they occapied a furnished room ; having missed several articles o f linen, she caused them to be apprehended. Ail officer proved taking the prisoners into custody : thee said the property was in pledge, and that the female had done it by the request of her husband. A pawnbroker, with whom a sheet had been pledged, proved that be received it from the female prisoner. Cullen; in his defence, did not deny the charge, and admitted that his wife had pledged the articles by his desire ; it was distress at the time, and hit intention was to have redeemed them before be left the lodgings. The COMMON-SW/ANT summed up the evidence to the Jury, who pronounced a verdict of Gail's against John Cullen, and aro. quitted Grace his wife. Patrick 111•Cee was convicted for stealing 401bs. weight of lead, the property of James Nichol, his master. The prisoner was sen tenced to be publicly whipped, and confined one month in the House of Correction. As the Earl of SuArresouni was, on Wednesday, leaving Dorchester, in his traveller carriage, one of the Witless fell at the bottom of the town, and the postbny under. Fortu na:cly no injury was sustained, except by the horse ' and that was Another horse Living been prosured, his Lordship pro cettled on hie journey. I I . 1 It