Star. — London, England, 1821-09-20 00:00:00

OLD BAILEY SESSIONS. Yesterday William Harding, aged 55. was charged with stealing six sheep, the property of Tlios.llen. Thomas Billen, the prosecutor, deposed, that on the 6th of July he saw his sheep in his field at Hen don. On the next day he missed them, and afterwards s aw them at Smithfield, under the care of a drover. Thomas Abrahams, a drover, servant to Luke Waugh, recollected that on a Monday the prosecutor s aw him at Smithfield with six sheep. He (the wit gess) first saw the sheep at Smithfield the Friday be fore, in the possession of the prisoner. On the Mon day following he was employed to drive the sheep from Hackney to Smithfield. J. Fildey deposed, that on Friday, the 6th of July, he bought six sheep from the prisoner at Smithfield. O n the Monday following he employed the laq wit rhess to Iftive the sheep from Hackney, whither the prisoner had taken them on Friday. On the Mon thy the prosecutor claimed the sheep at Smithfield, and the witness surrendered them to him. In his cross-examination the witness said he did not pay the prisoner for the sheep till Monday. The price he gave was 28 shillings each, Thomas Henning, a butcher boy, deposed, that on Friday, the 6th July, he met the prisoner in the Green lases, near Hornsey. The prisoner had six sheep with him, and he employed the witness to drive them to Smithfield. The witness drove the sheep to Smith field, and never saw them again till he saw them in the possession of the prosecutor at Hendon. Thomas Austin, a constable, deposed, that he ap the prisoner at Winchmore-hill on the re erne c s i da t7i y after the sheep were recovered. He went to the prisoner's house at three o'clock in the morn ing, and stated that he came to apprehend the pri soner. After waiting some time, and being refused admittance, he broke the door open. When lie en tered the house he saw a per-on sitting in the kitchen dressed in woman's clothe-. He searched the house for the prisoner but could not find him. Whilst he was up stairs, a person, named Wager, who had accompanied him to the house of the prisoner, called out that he bad found the prisoner disguised in woman's clothes. George Wager accompanied the last witness to apprehend the prisoner. He saw the prisoner come out of the house dressed in woman's clothes, accom panied by his son. He held a pocket-handkerchief :o his face, and appeared to be crying. The witness did not know the prisoner at first, and he had pro ceeded about .50 yards from the house when the wit ness having observed his shoes, ran after him and brought him back. The prisoner put in a written defence, in which he I stated, that on the morning of the 6th of July he bought nine sheep from a man named Thomas, and on his road to Smithfield he sold three of the sheep to a butcher for El 7s. 6d. each. He took the re- , wining sheep to Smithfield, and sold them publicly, , which, if he had come improperly by then, he would ; nu have done, as he had long been in the habit of , attending Smithfield Market, and was well known there. He accounted for being disguised in female apparel by stating, that he was apprehensive of being seized for debt. The prisoner called two witnesses, named James Howe and John Dickson, to prove that they had seen I Aim bargain for the sheep with the butcher, but their 1 evidence was extremely contradictory. The prisoner I called five witnesses as to his character, all of whom, se far as their knowledge went (which appeared ex tremely limiteJ), gave him a good one. Mr. Justice RICHA RDSON summed up the evidence, end stated his opinion that the prisoner had failed in establishing a satisfactory defence. The Jury immediately returned a verdict of Guilty. After the verdict was pronounced, Mr. ALLEY, the Counsel for the prosecution, stated that he would pro mute the witnesses Howe and Dickson, for perjury. The prisoner was again indicted for stealing ten deep, the property of John King, Eq. of Edmonton, at the 27th of June. There was nothing remarkable is the circumstances of this case as detailed iii evi dences and the Jury found a verdict of Not Guilty. John Smith was indicted for returning from trans portation without lass ful excuse. Mr. Anottaus stated, that on a former occasion the prisoner at the bar was tried by a London Jury for the offence of being at large in London without lawful excuse, be being at that time under sentence of transportation. The Jury on that occasion acquitted him. He now stood charged with being at large in the county of Middlesex on a'day previous to that oh which he was before charged with being at large in the city of London. The prisoner pleaded that the offence of which he was now accused was the same for which he had before been tried and acquitted. and that according to law he ought not to be tried twice fa the same offence. The Crown denied that this th the same offence, and this was the issue which the Jury would have to try. The prisoner, it ap peared, had been cor.victed of burglary, and sentenced 10 death, which had been commuted to transporta tion for life. The Learned Gentleman then advised the Jury, in forming their decision, to follow the di lution of the Court, as it was in fact merely a ques t:sof law. Several witnesses were then called, who proved that the prisoner was seen at large in the city of Lon de', on the 6th of June, in the second year of the reign of his present Majesty; and that he was also seen at large in the county of Middlesex on the 17th for April antecedent. LAW, for the defendant, observed, that the quegton which the Jury had to decide was, whether, in Paint of law, being at large in one county was the IThie etenie as being at large in another? The Sta te %leder which the prisoner was indicted stater), that I f all person with respect to whom the punish ment of death had been commuted to transportation for life 6 hesid at any time be found at large in any part of Great Britain, without lawful excuse, such Person should suffer death without benefit of clergy. ane Act also provided that a prisoner may be tried ejther in the county in which he was apprehended, or in that from which he was transported. It was a Principle of the English law that no man should be tyke put in jeopardy for the same offence. If the Jury should decide that the offence with which the prisoner was now charged was different from that foe which he had before been indicted, and if this de cision of the Jury should receive the sanction of the dgis, to whom the question would be finally re lated, the spirit of that sound principle of law to which he had al:uded would he controverted. If the present attempt should succeed, the consequence would be, that a man, after having been •once ac quitted, would be made to run the round of all the counties until he should be convicted. The first sa cred principle of ou r law, namely, that a man shall not be-twice put in jeopardy of his life for the same offence, would, for the first time, be overthrown. It depended on the result of the present issue whether a man who had been once acquitted should be dragged to trial, at the pleasure of any officer who might feel it his interest to prosecute him ? Mr. Justice RICIIARDSON then addressed the Jury, and said, that, as at present advised, it appeared to him that this was a different charge from the one which was formerly made against the prisoner. He did not, however, speak with great confidence on this point, and it was his intention, should the Jury take the same view of the case as he did, to refer the ques tion to the consideration of the Judges. The Jury, after a short consultation, declared that the offence for which the prisoner was indicted, was the same felony for which he had been before ac qoitted. The prisoner was then discharged. Manasseh Goldstein was indicted for feloniously forging and counterfeiting diverse Prussi sa notes for payment of one dollar, purporting to be Treasury notes of one of the ;Ministers and Officers employed in the service of the King of Prussia. The prisoner's age is sixty-two. Mr. LAW stated, that in some counts the instru ment was called an order, and in others an unJer taking of the Prussian Monarch or his Minister. Mr. BOLLAND stated the facts of the case to the Jury. lie commenced by reading an extract from an Act pa sed in the 43d of Geo.III. which provides that any person convicted of forging any promissory note or bill of exchange, with intent to defraud any foreign Prince or Minister, shall be liable to trans portation for a term not exceeding fourteen years. It was i r.: material whether the instrument was composed an the English or a foreign language, or in both to gether. In June last year two persons appeared in the city of Berlin, of the names of Lobb and Simeon, and were detected in uttering copies of the forged in strument which formed the subject of the present in dictment. A large number, some thousands, of the notes were found in their possession. The King of Prussia, in order to prevent the deterioration of his currency, considered it necessary to endeavour to dis cover the manufacturer of those notes. It having been intimated that the notes were manufactured in this country, the King of Prussia commanded the Director of his Police, Mr. Echard, to proceed to England with Simeon. On the 10th of July Mr. Echard arrived in London with Simeon. Simeon was supplied with money by Mr. Echard, and on different occasions purchased parcels of forged notes from the prisoner, amounting altogether to 5000, 6000, or 7000 notes. On the last occasion, when Simeon pur chased notes from the prisoner, he met him by ar pointivesit .'n the Strand bride. Foy and Clements, two Police officers, watched Simeon, to whom they had previously given two £5 notes, to pay for the forges, notes, and when they saw him give the money to the prisoner, they ran up anJ seized the latter.— Foy found the two £5 notes in the prisoner's hand, who said that he had received them in payment for some watches which he had sold to Simeon some time before. Foy asked him whether he had any of the King of Prussia's notes about him ? he said no ; and when searched, none were found on him. The prisoner was then asked it he knew where the forged plates were? He replied that he did not. Foy, how ever, who had been watching the prisoner for some time, and had frequently observed him go to the house of Mr. Newman, an engraver, in Widegate street, Bishopsgate, took the prisoner thither. Here the Learned Gentleman observed, that he fully ac quitted Mr. Newman of all blame in this transaction. Toe plate WAS tornposed in a language of which Mr. Newman was entirely ignorant, and he understood that it was an admission to a Theatre in Berlin.— When Foy arrived at Mr. Newman's, he found the plate at work, which he seized. It; in addition to the facts which he had already stated, it could be proved that the prisoner employed Mr. Newman to engrave the plates from which the forged instruments were struck off, and that he caused a peculiar species of paper to be manufactured for the purpose, he thought the Jury could entertain no doubt of the prisoner's guilt. Mr. BOLLAND then called the following evidence : William Newman deposed, that he was a copper plate engraver, living at 27, Widegate-street, Bishops gate-street. He knew the prisoner, and had some communication with him in March or April of the present year. He had known him personally for twenty years, but had never done business for him. When the prisoner called on him in March, he said he wanted a little business done in engraving. Wit ness asked what it was? and the prisoner then sheaved him a print like one of those in Court, and asked him whether he could engrave it? Witness replied yes, and asked what it was? The prisoner replied a Prussian ticket. Witness asked, what ticket? when the prisoner replied, a ticket of admission. The wit ness saw the word current, which was the only one he could make out, and was going to ask a question about it, when the prisoner said, •" GOD bless me, do you think I am going to give you anything wrong to do? You know me." Witness replied that he did. Witness then agreed to engrave the two plates, and to print 30,000 copies. He wanted them done in a fortnight. Witness replied that the time was too short; but that he would print 10,000 in a fortnight. The job was to be done for about t 3 a thousand.— The witness pulled proofs, and the prisoner not ap proving of the paper, agreed to find his own paper. Paper was included in the charge of £3 a thousand. The witness struck off 10,000 copies from the plate in about a fortnight or three weeks. The prisoner used to come to the shop and remove the printed copies from time to time. Three plates were used, because one was worn out; but only two plates were necessary to complete the impression. After the plates were struck off, a line of letter-press was in serted in red ink. This was also executed by the witness, he being a letter-press as well as a copper plate printer. About 7,000 or 8,000 copies were struck off before one of the plates was worn out.— The witness told the prisoner that be could not afford to provide a new plate for the money whichle was ' to receive for tile work. The prisoner then said he would give him two guineas if be would get a new plate. The plates were left with the witness. The - line of letter-press which was introduced was also in the original copy furnished by the prisoner. About August the prisoner told the witness that he had got a fresh order for 5.000. The prisoner himself brought the paper cut ready for receiving the impression.— About 2,000 of the latter order had been done when, Foy came to the shop. At that time the impressions were lying about the shop. The prisoner called at least thirty times during the execution of the two orders, and appeared very anxious to get the im pressions. ---The witness identified the plates and im pressions from them, and also the original from which the plates were made. Cross-examined by Mr. Atennews.—The prisoner did not say that the impressions were tickets for a theatre, but tickets of admission. The prisoner did not ask for proofs to shew to some other person for approbation. The prisoner took several proofs away. The prisoner said it was a shipping order. By a Juror.—The letter-press is formed by an raiglish type. By the COURT.—The witness does not understand either the German or the French language. William Richard Newman, the son of the last wit ness, deposed that he khew the prisoner, and had seen him at his father's shop on the subject of these instru ments (looking at thenotes). He had seen the prisoner cut Cie edges of the notes when printed. David Brown, a copper-plate printer, employed by Mr. Newman, had frequently seen the prisoner at his master's shop during the execution of the order for the notes. Timothy Noland, another !minter employed by Mr. Newman, stated, that he had seen the prisoner at his n.aster's shop on one occasion. Richard Smithermat, foreman to Messrs. Wise and Co. paper-manufacturers, at Maidstone, proved that orders were given to make a particular kind of paper for the prisoner. Foy, the officer, produced the paper which he took from Mr. Newman, the engraver, and Mr. Newman swore to the paper produced being that which he had from the prisoner. He could not be mistaken as to the paper. Smitherman's examination. was then continued.— In March, the prisoner came to the paper warehouse at Maidstone, and selected one paper as to the make of it, and another as to the colour. There s(•ere exe cuted for the prisoner 26,000 double sheets. The prisoner, witness understood, said that the paper was to be used abroad in lieu of money, by a planter, or something of that kind. Crass. examined.—There was another person came with the prisoner, and they spoke in a foreign lan guage. The prisoner seemed to act as an interpreter. Witness had never seen the person who came with the prisoner since. Augustus William Echard was examined by Mr. Schmidt, an interpreter.—He was inspector of Police at Berlin, and it was his duty to inspect dollar notes with a view to know whether they were forgeries or not. A paper was then put into witnesses hands, and he stated that it was a false note or receipt for the payment of one dollar. He had seen a great many .of them, shewn by Foy, the Officer, to him. In the month of May last several Jews were arrested at Berlin on the charge of passing these forged notes. Jews of the name of Lobb and Simeon were arrested, the former at Leipsic. Both Lobb and Simeon came to England, and arrived on the 10th of July. Wit ness put a letter intu the Post-Office at Hamburgh for the prisoner. Witness said the forged note bore the signature " Altenstein," the Prussian Minister, These notes were paid by the Treasury at Berlin, l Konigsberg, and Breslau. The proper appellation of the Minister was Baron Altenstein, and the name of the King of Prussia was Frederick William. Cross-examined.—He had nothing to do with the Office from whence these papers issued. There was no one present from the Office ; but witness had authority and instructions from the Prussian Treasury respecting these papers. These notes were current money in the realm. Every one who presented them could receive money for them, and they were given at all the Treasuries, both in payment of duties, and to receive money in return. Witness had seen money paid an hundred times for these notes, without the least deduction being made. The notes were current money throughout the country. Re-examincd.—Every tradesman in Berlin would .take these notes instead of money gladly. By the COURT.—Baron Altenstein was Minister of Finance at the time those notes were issued, and it was usual for him to sign them. It was an engraved fac simile of his hand-writing. John Schmidt, the interpreter, then looked at the good note and read it. It was in the German lan guage, and was numbered 995,670. It was a Trea sury note (or receipt) of one dollar in currency, ac cording to the standard of 1764, valid in all dealings in full, signed " Altenstein." On the other side was engraved, " Treasury note or receipt, of one dollar in currency. Office of Realization at Konigsberg." There was also a crown upon the note, with " F.W.R." under it, meaning " Frederick William Rex." Wit ness then looked at the forged note, and read it: it was also in the German language. "No.—, Trea sury note (or receipt) of one dollar in currency, ac cording to the standard of 1764, valid in all dealings in full. Signed, Altenstein." Cross-examined.—He should call a promissory note schuld-skein, and a receipt only shein. Peter Simeon now lived at 34,Villiers-street,Strand. —He had known the prisoner nine years, but never before had dealings with him. He had been in cus tody at Berlin. When he arrived in England he saw the prisoner the following day, and had some con versation with him. He told him, "I have been sent here by Mr. Lobb, to obtain the 5,000 notes, and I have the money to pay for them." Witness told the prisoner he had received a letter from Mr. Lobb to that effect. The prisoner acknowledged receiving the letter. Witness was present when some former notes were given to Mr. Lobb by the prisoner. This was at No. 43, Lant-street, in the Borough. A forged note was here handed to the witness, and he said the notes were of that description. The prisoner always spoke German to him, and the notes in question were , engraved in that language. When witness asked for the 5,000 notes for Mr. Lobb, the prisoner said, "I must have some money beforehand." Witness said how much? The prisoner answered, " E. 5." Witness said he would get it for him, and then he went to Foy, the Officer, who gave him £5, and marked it first. Witness was always searched by Foy before be went to the prisoner. He received notes twice ~,.• r - 7.- from the — prisoner; the first time 1,200, and-the second time — WM. An appointment was afterward; made to pay the prisoner £lO more, and then prisoner was apprehended at Waterloo-bridge. Crossezamined.—He had only been once in ass tody, and that was in Prussia. He was imprisoned from the 21st of May to the 28th of June. He wai now upon his parole. By the Bench.—When the original order was given by Lobb, he (Lobb) was furnished with a good Prus sian note. John Foy, the officer, was next examined. Simeon was put under his direction. On the 30th of Jul he received 1200 notes, which he marked. He took the prisoner into custody on the Ist of August, on Waterloo-bridge. On that day witness had given Simeon two £5 notes, and when the prisoner a as ap prehended he had them in his hand. Witness asked him where he got them ? and he said, " From Mr Simeon." Witness asked for what purpose? and he replied, " For some watches I sold him." Witness told him that he was charged with forging some Prussian notes. The prisoner denied the fact. Wit ness said, " I am certain you have," and asked I the plates. The prisoner denied all knowledge them, and witness said, they are at Mr. Newman': house. Witness added, that he should search New man's house. The prisoner then said, "If you de, you will not find them; but if you will allow me tr go, I will point out the place where they are to be found." The prisoner was then taken to the Office, and witness went to Mr. Newman's house. There he found two men pulling off impressions from twt. plates, which ssitness took possession of, and marked Nos. 1 and 2. There was also a type, with some red ink upon it. Witness produced the two £5 notes which he found on the prisoner. Witness had marked them before he had given them to Simeon. Cross-examined.—He was not near enough to Si meon to hear what passed between him and the pri soner when the two £5 notes were given. Thomas Clements, another police-officer. He knew a person of the name of Simeon. Witness went wit' him to the house of the prisoner, at Shadwell High street ; but did not go in. Simeon was searched be fore lie went in, and had no notes upon him. When he returned he had a parcel of notes with him, which were given to Foy, the officer. Witness never lust sight of Simeon. This was on Monday, July 30. The nest day Simeon went again to the prisoner's house, and brought out a second parcel of notes, which were also given to Foy. Witness assisted apprehending the prisoner, and also in the search Mr. Newman s house. Cross-esarained.—He saw Simeon go into the pri soner's house, but was not near enough to hear am conversation between them. Charles Christmas, a police-officer, proved that he saw the prisoner go into Newman's house twice July last. A bundle of the forged notes was then proved be false Prussian receipts, by the witness Augustus William Echard. Mr. BOLLAND here closed the case on the part , the prosecution. Mr. PLATT, as Counsel for the prisoner, main. tained that the instrument in question, which the psi. soner was charged to have forged, was not properly called in the indictment, for it was not a promissory note, or undertaking for the payment of money, nor an order for the payment of money. The document did not bear upon the face of it the name of any per. son who was compelled to pay the money. Mr. BOLLAND, in reply, contended that the 43d the King was intended to include foreign securities, and that by the language of the note itself it would be seen to be an " undertaking for the payment - money," and the words, " Office of Realization at Ko- nig sberg," plainly shewed it. Mr. Justice Ilictraanson overruled the objection. The prisoner was then called upon for his defence. The pt ironer then addressed the Court.—" All have got to say is, that I have done it from distress alone. Gentlemen, I have a wife and seven helpless children, and I did this to give them the bread which I had no other means of obtaining. I assure yon, Gentlemen, I did not know there was any harm what I did. I asked Mr. Lobli whether there lips any illegality in the transaction, and M r . Lobb Fut his hand upon his heart (the prisoner described the manner), and said,' Upon my honour and soul there is no illegality in the transaction: This is all that know, Gentlemen." A great many witnesses, chiefly neighbours of the prisoner's, were called to give him a character. They declared him to be an upright, honest man. Mr. Justice RICHARDSON summed up the evidence with great perspicuity, and particularly called the attention of the Jury to the conversation which passed between Foy the officer and the prisoner, when ar prehended. The question was, whether the prisoner could have made these notes with an innocent design ? Witnesses to character had been called, but their ev 7 dence would not weigh against clear facts, proved good testimony. The Jury, with very little deliberation, found verdict—Guilty. The prisoner was then removed from the dock.-- He did not seem to be much affected when the verdict was pronounced. The Court was crowded during the trial, and many of the Jewish persuasion were anxious spectators. GENTLIMAN IN MACK !—Dining the reign of the celebrated pickpocket Ilarringtors, an alarm was one night raised in the boa lobby of Covent-Carden Theatre, that he was in the house. The news spread from box to box like electricity. One gentleman had lost a snuff-box, another his watch, une lady her purse, ano ther her smelling-bottle; in fact, everybody had ion, or raid they had lost something. Behit.d Mrs. J —s, the sitter of the late Earl of C , sat a gentkenut in black, who, with much liteness, communicated to her this most dreadful intelligence , " The villain," said she, whipping a splendid pair of brilliant ear-rings out of her ears, and putting them carefully into her pocket-book, " shan't have my ear-tiugs, I promise him !". When the Play was over, adjourned to the reed my Lady D--. Upon entering the drawing.noom, s h e new , bee dear, dear friend," and, after embracing her with transport, told her Ladyship what an escape she, had had of that " horrid villain Barrington," felicitating herself that only for her amazing ingenuity and cleverness she must certainly have lost her drops. As she could now with perfect safety hang out her gems, she thrust her hand into her pocket ; but, after a coke or two, , changed colour and started—" Us has them, said she, in army. " Impossible," said her sympathetic friend, " intra. dDk !" Alas! it was too true. After the most santittous rum mage, they were nowhere to be found. Upon diligent I= it appeared that the very Gentleman in block, who had so cautioned Mrs. acabut Barrington, was Barrington MO self. As so o n as the Lady bad deposited bee brilliants in b packet, that able staid skilfully extracted theta I •.•kwrif. - • , and . • ade was es- ied ras • en • on tly ok on en sp- ed Ir. he ► me 'it- for of n's w- in, to be ce, he wo ted red : ites :ed 1 , ew k • • ith be- len ich • • ust CS, in of my / he ,• • in to sus of I i• t • fly Dry nor _ • . • ent er. • I of es, I ild of c i t n. ce. 1 I ess ess ich on, in Kst . the ere I it I the iey nce the sed ap- ncr ;n? rri- by a the ded • I ion • ated The said . late PG- lee I kat her !" a of w to wet, aid zing reps. she • ass P M ' 1101.• iti47 hiao- ~..,~"'^